from application to graduation - wits.ac.za · proposal submissions faculty e nrollments, amendment...
TRANSCRIPT
1
“From Application to Graduation”
Guidelines for Faculty of Humanities
Postgraduate Processes 2019
https://www.wits.ac.za/humanities/faculty-
services/postgraduate-services/registration/faculty-guidelines/
2
Contents “From Application to Graduation” ................................................................................................................ 1
Guidelines for Faculty of Humanities Postgraduate Processes ............................................................. 1
FACULTY OF HUMANITIES - FACULTY REGISTRAR’S OFFICE ................................................................ 5
Where to find us ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Service Charter ............................................................................................................................................... 5
Feedback .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Contact Details of Faculty Staff .................................................................................................................. 7
APPLICATION FOR POSTGRADUATE STUDY IN THE FACULTY OF HUMANITIES ......................... 16
The application process ............................................................................................................................. 16
Deadlines ........................................................................................................................................................ 17
Masters by Research and PhD applications ......................................................................................... 17
International Students: Application Procedures ................................................................................. 19
International Office ..................................................................................................................................... 20
REGISTRATION .................................................................................................................................................. 21
Registration for the degrees of Master of Arts by Research (Dissertation; all fields), Doctor
of Philosophy (all fields) ............................................................................................................................. 22
Registration as a student awaiting examination ................................................................................. 23
Clearance to Register for International Students ............................................................................... 23
Amendments to registration .................................................................................................................... 24
Exemption and Credits............................................................................................................................... 25
Period of study ............................................................................................................................................. 26
Amendments ................................................................................................................................................ 27
Academic Performance .............................................................................................................................. 27
3
FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIPS ....................................................................................................... 28
Postgraduate Merit Award (PMA) ........................................................................................................... 28
Criteria in the selection of PMA ............................................................................................................... 28
Awaiting examiner grants ......................................................................................................................... 29
SUPERVISION OF POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH ....................................................................................... 30
Allocation of supervisors ........................................................................................................................... 30
Supervision of one candidate by another ............................................................................................ 31
Supervision agreement: Statement of principles ............................................................................... 31
Duties of a Supervisor ................................................................................................................................ 32
Responsibilities of the candidate ............................................................................................................ 33
FORMS................................................................................................................................................................. 34
PROPOSALS ....................................................................................................................................................... 35
The external (or standard) proposal reading system ........................................................................ 36
The internal proposal reading system ................................................................................................... 36
Ethics Clearance Requirements ............................................................................................................... 39
Progress reports .......................................................................................................................................... 43
THE EXAMINATION PROCESS ...................................................................................................................... 45
Nomination of Examiners .......................................................................................................................... 45
Internal examiners ....................................................................................................................................... 46
External examiners....................................................................................................................................... 47
Examiner guidelines .................................................................................................................................... 48
Submission of research reports, dissertations and theses for examination ............................... 48
Submission deadlines ................................................................................................................................. 49
Supervisor’s responsibility on submission of work for examination ............................................. 50
Extension Requests for Submission of Research for Examination ................................................. 53
Procedures following the return of examiners’ reports .................................................................... 54
The Ad hoc process ..................................................................................................................................... 55
Ad hoc meetings by electronic circulation ........................................................................................... 56
Face-to-face ad hoc meetings ................................................................................................................. 56
Revisions after Examination ...................................................................................................................... 57
Awaiting Examiner Grants ......................................................................................................................... 58
4
Coursework Examination ........................................................................................................................... 59
GRADUATION PROCESSES ............................................................................................................................ 60
OTHER IMPORTANT AND/OR USEFUL INFORMATION ........................................................................ 62
Humanities Graduate Centre .................................................................................................................... 62
University Accommodation ...................................................................................................................... 62
Johannesburg at a glance ......................................................................................................................... 63
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................................................... 65
Guidelines for Honours, MA and PhD Research ................................................................................. 65
5
FACULTY OF HUMANITIES - FACULTY REGISTRAR’S OFFICE
Where to find us
HUMANITIES FACULTY OFFICES
ROOM 7, SOUTH WEST ENGINEERING BUILDING
EAST CAMPUS (NEXT TO THE GREAT HALL)
Service Charter
In the Faculty of Humanities we as a team are committed to:
Providing you with a friendly, efficient and reliable service from Monday to Friday
(08h00 to 16h30);
Being professional and committed in our dealings with you at all times;
Correcting our errors timeously;
Following up on service complaints within 48 hours;
Respecting the privacy and confidentiality of your personal information (PoPI Act);
Creating an accessible environment;
Responding to your inquiries within 48 hours;
Providing you with accurate information in accordance with the University and Faculty
Rules.
You as student can help us to deliver a better service by:
Being friendly, courteous and respectful to us in our working environment;
Being honest and providing us with all relevant and accurate information;
Trusting our knowledge;
Reading all electronic and paper based information provided to you by Faculty;
Asking Faculty Officers if you are unsure of any Faculty information, regulations or
policies;
Familiarizing yourself with the Faculty and University Rules; and following the
University escalation policy when applicable;
Providing us with feedback on our service;
Switching off your cell phone as a courtesy when consulting with us;
Informing us if your registration information is incorrect and needs updating;
Accessing the Student Portal on the Wits Website regularly.
Using online student platforms when applying for deferred examinations, WRC
applications and updating personal information.
6
Feedback:
We value your constructive feedback, suggestions and comments for us to better our
service to you. Please contact the Faculty Office:
HUMANITIES FACULTY OFFICE – ROOM 7, SW ENGINEERING BUILDING, EAST
CAMPUS
Lebo Mokone ([email protected]) – 011 717 4008
Madile Moeketsi ([email protected]) – 011 717 4002
Maropeng Maake ([email protected]) – 011 717 4005
EDUCATION FACULTY OFFICE – ROOM 209, ADMIN BLOCK, EDUCATION
CAMPUS
Asanda Magudumana ([email protected]) – 011 717 3332
Thabo Makuru ([email protected]) – 011 717 3018
Please visit us on , and the Faculty of Humanities Website;
Feedback will be treated with respect and confidentiality.
7
Faculty of Humanities
Contact Details of Faculty Staff
Staff
member E-mail address
Telephone
extension Responsibilities
Mrs Hale
Modau
[email protected] 74007 Faculty Registrar
Extraordinary queries, by
referral only
Academic developments
process
Rules and syllabus process
Faculty Registry oversight
Please contact Miss Asiya
Mahomed with any queries
Ms Asiya
Mahomed
[email protected] 74001 Office Coordinator to
Faculty Registrar
Admin Assistance to
Asst Deans upon
request.
Prize giving assistant
Administers finance
processes (IR,
payments, budget)
Manages Faculty
website
Coordinates
applications UG and PG
and proposals for
School of Social
Sciences and Wits
School of Arts
8
Mrs
Genevieve
Kamfer
78201 Deputy Faculty Registrar
(main campus)
Extraordinary queries
Graduations
Timetable scheduling
Prize giving
Reports to Faculty Registrar
Heads main campus Faculty
Office
Ms Ayanda
Zwane
[email protected] 78202 Faculty officer (Main
Campus)
Faculty submissions for
examination
Circulation of nominated
examiners’ details to Core
Group of GSC
Sending out of reports to
internal and external
examiners
Sending correspondence to
student and supervisor
regarding outcome of
research examination
Servicing and coordinate
ad- hoc committee
meetings
Servicing Graduate Studies
Committee meetings
Faculty enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Tracking of publishable
manuscript prior to PhD
graduation
9
Mrs
Bonisiwe
Mokhabuki
[email protected] 74004 UG and PG Senior Faculty
Officer (main campus)
Processing of ETD/final
submissions
Faculty enrollments and
2way checks
Undergraduate Studies
Committee coordinator
Servicing and
coordination of
undergraduate Board of
Examiners meeting
Faculty amendments
(UG and PG) first
semester processing
and administering
Team leader
Assist with graduation
checks
Mrs Rene
Jordaan
[email protected] 78203 Faculty Officer
Coordinates PG
proposal process:
School of Literature,
Language and Media
School of Geography,
Archeology and
Environmental Sciences
School of Human and
Community
development
Assist with processing
of Faculty research
examinations process
10
Processing of Faculty
research proposals
Process and manage PG
midyear fee reversal for
research submissions
Faculty enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Processing and
servicing of Faculty
WRC
Services and coordinate
Faculty Committee
Ms Madile
Moeketsi
[email protected] 74002 Faculty Officer
Coordinates UG and PG
applications:
School of Literature,
Language and Media
School of Geography,
Archeology and
Environmental Sciences
School of Human and
Community
development
Processing occasional
applications
Tracking of RPL
applicants
PG
application/readmission
appeals
Processing of deferred
exam applications (UG
11
and PG first semester)
for Faculty
Processes and manages
verification checks for
Faculty (UG and PG)
Faculty enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Mr
Maropeng
Maake
[email protected] 74005 Faculty Officer
Capturing of supervisor
details for Faculty
Coordinate and
processes progress
reports (UG and PG) for
Faculty
Drafts and manages
fees memos for Faculty
Processing of 20%
penalty for PG students
Faculty enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Faculty deferred exam
applications (UG and
PG) processing of
second semester
Faculty extra time
applications (UG and
PG) processing
Services and coordinate
Faculty Committee
12
Mr Veli
Mongwe
[email protected] 74013 Faculty Officer
Processing of
occasional studies applications
PG
application/readmission
appeals
Servicing and coordination
of Faculty Committee
Tracking of RPL applicants
Proposal submissions
Faculty enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Processing and
administering of Faculty
amendments 2nd semester
Mrs Lebo
Mokone
[email protected] 74008 Administrative Assistant
Faculty general
enquiries (UG and PG)
Maintaining student
filing system
Faculty academic
Transcripts (UG and PG)
Faculty verifications (UG
and PG)
Faculty enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Payment of external
examiner claims
Extracting student files
for CRO
13
Education Campus
Mrs Delaine
Pillay
[email protected] 73021 Senior Faculty officer
(Education Campus)
Heads Education Office.
Circulation of nominated
examiners’ details to Core
Group of GSC
Sending out of reports to
internal and external
examiners
Sending correspondence to
student and supervisor
regarding outcome of
research examination.
Payment of external
examiners
Receipt and circulation of
examiners’ reports
Servicing ad hoc
committee meetings
Servicing Graduate Studies
Committee meetings.
Servicing
postgraduate Board of
Examiners meeting
Postgraduate and
undergraduate mark
amendments and upload
Enrollments, amendments
and 2way checks
14
Assists with graduation
checks
Front Desk
Ms Asanda
Magudumana
73332
Faculty Admin Asst
UG/PG Administrative
Assistant
All Education queries
Transcript orders
Verification checks
Processing of extra-time
and deferred exam
requests
Mr Thabo
Makuru
[email protected] 73018 UG/PG Faculty officer
All Education queries
Coordinates UG
application process
Captures and manages
PG application process
Processing of proposal
process
Processing of PG
progress reports
Capturing of supervisor
details
Enrollments,
amendments and 2way
checks
Processing of fees
memo
Processing of extra-
time and deferred
exam requests
15
Assistant Deans: Graduate Studies
TBA
TBA
Chair Faculty Graduate
Studies Committee (Semester
1)
Amendments & extension
requests
Examiner nominations
Proposal approvals
RPL requests
and extraordinary cases
Professor
Hugo
Canham
74516
Chair Faculty Graduate
Studies Committee (Semester
2)
Examination (all matters
incl reports & ad-hocs
Progress reports
Appeals
and extraordinary cases
16
APPLICATION FOR POSTGRADUATE STUDY IN THE
FACULTY OF HUMANITIES
The application process
During the application process, prospective students for all degrees offered by the Faculty
apply for admission to their chosen programme of study by completing an application form
via the Student Enrolment Centre (SENC). Each programme within the Faculty can then accept
or reject an applicant based on that programme’s assessment of his or her application.
Where do students collect application forms?
Prospective students should apply online. The applications submission process is managed by
the Student Enrolment Centre (aka SENC), located on the Ground Floor, Solomon Mahlangu
House (formerly Senate House). Alternatively, applicants may download the application form
from: http://www.wits.ac.za/postgraduate/applications/
Where do students submit completed application forms?
Completed application forms must be submitted to the Student Enrolment Centre only, and
should not be received by individual schools, departments or course coordinators. This is to
ensure that the progress of all applications can be tracked from the Student Enrolment
Centre.
Application forms can be submitted in person to the Student Enrolment Centre or submitted
online. Applicants are advised to request an acknowledgement of receipt for their own
records.
17
Deadlines
What is the deadline for the receipt of applications from prospective students?
Generally, students wishing to begin their studies in January each year must submit
completed application forms in the year before to Student Enrolment Centre by:
30 August – International Students;
30 November - South African Students.
However, some programmes within the Faculty have set earlier deadlines such as
The School of Human and Community Development, and the departments of Journalism and
Drama for Life; students who wish to apply for these programmes should confirm the closing
dates with the relevant departments.
Masters by Research and PhD applications
Applications should be submitted at least 3 months prior to the desired start of the
programme and/or registration in order to ensure there is sufficient time for the relevant
department or School to review the application. For the Masters by Research and the PhD,
there are four registration periods during the academic year: January, April, July and
September. Please contact the relevant department or School to enquire what supporting
documents are required with your application.
How do applications reach departments or programmes for selection?
Following receipt of a prospective student’s complete application, a notification is sent
electronically to the department and faculty concerned. The department uploads a decision
on the Student Information Management System (SIMS) and a notification is sent to the
relevant Faculty for final processing.
18
How do programmes or departments select students?
Each department will establish a set of admission and selection criteria for its programmes of
study. However, the number of places in a programme may be limited and not all applicants
satisfying the criteria may be accepted. In such cases, the department will establish
procedures and criteria for selecting successful applicants from among all those who qualify.
Students are selected either on an individual basis or through a group screening process;
each of these processes is discussed below.
Selecting students on an individual basis
Departments / programmes that choose to evaluate each prospective student’s application
on its own merits are said to select students individually. Student will receive notification of
the outcome of the application via the e-mail address provided to the University. Students
must access their self-service portal to accept the offer.
For MA Dissertation and PHD applications, students must register during the nest registration
period immediately following acceptance of the offer or notify the Faculty should they wish to
defer their application to a later registration period in the same calendar year. Registrations
may only be deferred to a new academic year after submission of a new application.
Selecting students on a group basis
Some departments/programmes indicate a firm deadline for applications, and follow this with
an application review process in which all applications received are considered in relation to
one another; alternatively or additionally, applicants may be required to undergo selection
tests, interviews and/or auditions following receipt of applications.
While programmes may indicate provisional acceptance, the official letter of acceptance or
rejection must come from the Faculty Office. Waitlisted students will not be informed
officially until a final decision has been made, normally upon receipt of results.
19
How are students informed about the results of their applications?
Following the approval of programme decisions by the Chair of the Graduate Studies
Committee, the application system generates an outcome letter with respect to each
programme for which application was made. The letter is emailed to the student. NB:
Departmental outcome letters are considered provisional and are not recognized as being
final; only outcome letters issued by the and Faculty bearing the official University branding
are considered final.
International Students: Application Procedures
Enquiries should be directed to the Student Enrolment Centre or the Faculty Office (see
http://www.wits.ac.za/postgraduate/applications/ for more information). The following
documents must be submitted to the Student Enrolment Centre:
1. A completed application form and the non-refundable application fee (as a bank draft
made payable to the University of the Witwatersrand, in the South African currency of
“Rand”).
2. A completed application form for accommodation to be submitted with the
application form for study.
3. Certified copies of all your programme (degree) certificates. Request universities or
institutions to send a full academic transcript covering all periods of registration to
each Faculty to which you are applying. Include all details of courses undertaken and
the marks obtained. Any documentation not in English must be translated by an
authorized translator and certified as authentic.
4. Curriculum vitae.
5. A short outline of your intended research area (no more than one typed page) – for
Masters (by research) or PhD applicants. For a Master of Arts programme (degree),
submit a sample of research work or a long essay written or translated into English.
6. Two reference letters from people of authority (two people who have taught you or
supervised your work at a tertiary institution - not family).
7. Proof of English proficiency.
20
8. SAQA evaluation certificate, www.saqa.org.za
9. Enquiries in respect of evaluation of your application may be addressed to:
The South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA)
Helpdesk: 086 010 3188
Switchboard: +27 12 431 5000
Fax: +27 12 431 5039
Website: www.saqa.org.za
International Office
The University’s International Office offers support to international students. Located
on the Concourse level of Solomon Mahlangu House (previously Senate House), the
International Office provides a wide range of services including general enquiries
from prospective students, immigration advice and advocacy, assistance with matric
exemptions, advice on safety, and general advice about your stay at Wits. The
International Office supplements the services provided by faculties and departments
and has strong relations with service providers within and outside of Wits.
In cooperation with the Strategic Partnerships Office (SPO), the International Students
Office also facilitates the Semester Study Abroad Programme as well as other
programmes creating opportunities for Wits students to study/conduct research at
partner universities abroad.
21
REGISTRATION
After you have applied for admission, and received an official acceptance into a programme
of study, you will need to register as a student.
During the registration process, students who have been accepted for their chosen courses of
study enroll formally in the Faculty of Humanities, as well as in specific disciplines and
programmes. Students must register for each academic year until the completion of their
degree.
Registration for the degrees of Bachelor of Arts with Honours / Master of Arts by Coursework
and Research Report
In advance of the registration period, details of registration are e-mailed to all students via
their I-Wits e-mail. Students enrolling for BA Honours and MA (Coursework and Research
Report) degrees typically register in January or February, prior to the commencement of the
academic year. To accommodate the large number of students needing to register, this
registration takes place in Hall 29 (West Campus).
MA by Dissertation and PhD students may register during the first registration period
following their official acceptance by the university. Registrations for these degrees can take
place in January, April, July or September.
Students with queries about registration dates may contact the Postgraduate Faculty officers.
How do students register?
On arrival, each student receives a curriculum planning sheet and then proceeds to the table
staffed by representatives of the Division/department in which he or she seeks to register. An
academic member of staff will advise the student regarding her/his curriculum and will need
to sign the student’s completed curriculum form to indicate approval of the curriculum.
Forms must also be signed by the Programme Coordinator or Academic Head-Postgraduate
for students to proceed with their registration.
22
Once the forms have been signed, the student proceeds to the table staffed by Faculty
administrators for final endorsement before proceeding to the computer terminals for online
registration. The student may then proceed to the ICAM and Parking Office representatives to
obtain their student cards and parking permits.
What is required of academic staff during the registration process?
The Faculty Office asks that one or more staff representing each programme offered in the
Faculty be present at the registration venue throughout the registration process. Academic
staff are requested to “sign off” on the chosen curricula of Honours and MA by Coursework
and Research Report students in their divisions, answer correctly questions pertaining to
particular programmes and courses, and guide students in their selection of courses where
necessary. Bearing this in mind, the Faculty office recommends that staff actively involved in
the Honours and MA by Coursework and Research Report programmes be present during
registration, as they are best qualified to offer guidance to students.
Registration for the degrees of Master of Arts by Research
(Dissertation; all fields), Doctor of Philosophy (all fields)
A student registering for either degree listed above may register online from home or may
register in person at the Faculty Office in the designated period in January, April, July and
September in the first year of enrollment. All returning students must register in January of
each year until completion of their degree. The Faculty office will clearly communicate the
registration dates by e-mail to students and schools at least one month in advance of the
commencement of the registration period, and will ensure that a suitably qualified member of
the Faculty staff is available to assist students with their registration.
Students with queries about registration dates may contact the Postgraduate Faculty Officers.
23
Registration as a student awaiting examination
A student previously registered for the degree of Master of Arts by Coursework and Research
Report, Master of Arts by Dissertation or PhD, who has completed all the coursework
requirements for his / her degree (if any), and who has submitted his / her research report,
dissertation or thesis to the Faculty office for examination, must re-register as a student at the
start of each academic year (no later than the 15th of February) while his / her work is under
examination. A nominal fee is payable with the “Awaiting Examiners” registration. Students
should note that examiners are given 6 – 8 weeks to submit an examiner’s report to the
Faculty office.
Additionally, a “Copyright Fee”, as reflected on the Fees Statement of a student so registered,
is payable by both local and international students. It recognises the student’s right to use
library facilities during his or her continuing registration.
Students awaiting examination should register in the Faculty Office during the designated
period (15 February). The Faculty office will clearly communicate the registration dates by –e-
mail to students and schools at least one month ahead of the commencement of the
registration period, and will ensure that a suitably qualified member of the Faculty staff is
available to assist students with their registration.
Students with queries about registration dates may contact the Postgraduate Faculty Officers.
Clearance to Register for International Students
This is applicable each time that you register:
STEP 1: Medical Aid Cover
For Degree Seeking Students
To study in South Africa you need to be medically covered for the full duration of your
studies. According to legislation, the medical aid has to be a South African administered
end/or recognized product paid up to 31 December of the year of registration. The
24
University advises, amongst other coverage, that the product include provisions for doctor’s
visits, hospitalization, medicines and emergencies.
For Short-term / Occasional / Semester Students
To study in South Africa, you need to purchase a minimum of 6 months medical aid cover; as
outline above. Most Medical Aid companies will refund the unused portion of the medical
aid cover. Enquire about this option with the company at the time of purchase as each
company has different requirements for refunds.
Step 1 is not required for Refugees, Asylum Seekers and individuals studying for 3
months or less; however it is recommended that you purchase medical aid cover for the
duration of the study period.
STEP 2: Study Permit
It is important to note that from time to time, the Department of Home Affairs updates its
requirements. Study Permits are normally only issued to one institution. The following are
the current requirements to be submitted to the South African Embassy/Consulate in your
country to obtain your Study Permit:
1. A passport valid for not less than 30 days after intended studies;
2. The Department of Home Affairs requires an administrative fee payable upfront.
Amendments to registration
A student who needs to change his or her details after registration may do so, using a
Graduate Studies Amendment Form. Changes to a student’s name or address, substantive
changes relating to course registration and changes of research report / dissertation / thesis
title, as well as requests for extensions of time for submission of proposals or research, are all
made using the Amendment Form which is available from the Faculty office. Person details
may be updated online via the student portal.
25
What is the deadline for amendments to course registration?
Semester one
A student registered for an Honours or Master of Arts by Coursework and Research Report
degree may register for additional or alternative courses during the two weeks following
registration, and may cancel first semester courses up to one month before the examination
period begins.
Semester two
A student registered for an Honours or Master of Arts by Coursework and Research Report
degree may register for additional or alternative courses during the week following the
commencement of the second semester, and may cancel second semester courses until
September 30 of each year.
How do I complete the Amendment Form correctly?
Coursework modules
Amendments to coursework modules must be accompanied by the approval of the relevant
course Coordinator, as well as supporting signatures from the School Graduate Studies
Coordinator and Head of School. The student must also include a short supporting statement.
Exemption and Credits
There has been some confusion around credits and exemptions. This is clarified in the general
definitions G1.6 and 1.9 which state:
“1.6 Credit means the recognition that is obtained when a student passes such examinations
or tests and complies with such conditions as the Senate may impose for the completion of
each course. A credit towards a qualification may be granted to a student in respect of a
credit obtained from another institution recognized by the Senate for this purpose or from
another faculty within the University.
1.9 Exemption from a course means that the Senate has deemed a student to have a
sufficient understanding of the subject matter of that course to warrant the student not
having to complete the course. An exemption is not a credit but allows the student to
26
proceed to the subsequent year of study in a particular course. The full number of credits
required for a qualification is not affected by the granting of an exemption.”1
Credit Recognition
Recognition of prior credits completed is not automatic.
As per University Senate Standing Orders on ‘Course Credit Recognition’:
“1.3.10 Credit recognition and course exemption approvals carry a limited “shelf life”;
approval by the Senate of the credit or exemption shall normally be valid for no more than
four years from the time of approval. In exceptional cases, the Dean may rule otherwise.”
“1.3.11 The Senate may withdraw or refuse to grant credits and/or exemptions if, in the
opinion of the Senate, the time which has elapsed between obtaining the credit or exemption
and completion of the other requirements for the award of a qualification is excessive or is
excessive in view of the nature of the subject (See Rule G7.9).”
Period of study
As per the Senate Standing Orders:
Minimum (n) and maximum period of study (n + 2)
The minimum period of study (n) for each higher degree is set out in the rules for degrees.
The maximum period of study for higher degrees shall not normally extend beyond two years
after (n). A student who has completed (n) + 2 years of study and wishes to continue his/her
studies must submit an application for extension of candidature to the Faculty Graduate
Studies Committee. The Faculty Graduate Studies Committee will consider the matter and
may only grant an extension of one year if there are compelling reasons to do so and will
impose escalated fees of 20% for the additional year of study.
Students who are registered for Masters and PhD degrees will not be allowed to extend their
registration beyond (n) + 3.
1 http://www.wits.ac.za/depts/wcs/rules/generalrules.pdf
27
Amendments
Research reports / Dissertations / Theses
Amendments to research must be accompanied by the approval of the relevant School
Graduate Studies co-coordinator, Head of School and supervisor, as well as short supporting
statements from the student and supervisor.
Academic Performance
As per the Faculty rules:
The Senate may cancel the registration of a postgraduate student registered for a
programme by research if a Higher Degrees Committee (or equivalent), on the
recommendation of the relevant supervisor(s) and Head of School, has considered the
research proposal and/or other milestones of the research of that student to be
unsatisfactory. Such cancellation will only be implemented if the Senate, through the
relevant Higher Degrees Committee, has judged the research proposal, or the student’s
progress towards the milestones to be academically unsatisfactory or, in material aspects,
incomplete.
The Higher Degrees Committee may appoint a panel comprising one member of the
Higher Degrees Committee, the relevant Supervisor and the relevant Head of School for
the purpose of advising the Higher Degrees Committee. Reasons must be given when
such registration is cancelled.
An appeal against such cancellation may be made to the Dean of the Faculty, who will
then establish an ad-hoc committee to review the case. The three-person ad-hoc
committee will be chaired by the Dean. The Chairperson of the Higher Degrees
Committee, the Head of School and/or the Supervisor (or equivalent) may be in
attendance. If the ad-hoc committee does not permit renewal of registration, the student
has the right to submit a further appeal to the Deputy Vice Chancellor (DVC): Academic,
who may consult with the Dean. The decision of the DVC: Academic, acting on behalf of
the Council, shall be final.
Fee implications associated with the cancellation of registrations are outlined in the
Schedule of Fees books.
The process described above will also apply to a postgraduate student registered for a
programme which includes coursework.
28
FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIPS
Postgraduate Merit Award (PMA)
The PMA is a university-funded financial aid scheme for supporting postgraduate study. The
aim of the PMA is to assist graduates with a strong academic record to complete Honours,
Masters and PhD degrees either by research or by a combination of coursework and research
on a full-time basis. PMA does not assist students who are registered on part-time basis.
Criteria in the selection of PMA
For Honours, students must obtain a minimum mark of 65% in the major course in which they
wish to proceed to Honours and a minimum rating of 1.75 for Humanities and Commerce,
Law & Management Faculties or 2.00 for Science, Health Science and the Built Environment
Faculties.
International students must obtain an average of 2.1, 70% or a upper second class pass for
their Honours degree.For the PhD, students must have completed their Master’s degree in
one or two years on a full-time basis or in the case of part time studies, within three years.
Students who have not met the criteria for PMA may be eligible for Postgraduate Financial
Assistance which is available for financially needy students based on the NSFAS National
Means Test.
The normal tenure of PMA is:
Honours 1 year
Masters 2 years
PhD 3 years
School Duties:
Students in receipt of PMA are required to perform six-hour duties per week, which shall be
allocated to them by the Head of School. Duties must be of an academic nature so that a
student derives some teaching or research training from the work.
29
Payment of Stipends:
Payment of stipends is made in four instalments. Students must complete signed claim forms
and give them to the Head of School/Supervisor.
PMA Awards:
Honours students receive a stipend of R6 000.00 plus 100% tuition fee
Masters students receive a stipend of R6 800.00 plus 100% tuition fee
PhD students receive a stipend of R9 000.00 plus 100% tuition fee
Closing date:
Students wishing to apply for the PMA must submit a completed application form by 30
August in the year before the January/February registration or in March for the
July/September registration periods.
Awaiting examiner grants
Doctoral students are invited to apply for the Awaiting Examiners Grant through their School
or department’s Postgraduate Coordinator when submitting the PhD for examination. See
Awaiting examiner grants under The Examination Process. The Awaiting Examiner’s grant is
intended to assist doctoral students to draft an article for publication from the PhD – a
requirement for graduation. Six months after being awarded the grant, doctoral students
must submit a report to the school PhD/PG coordinator detailing how the grant was used and
the publications resulting (or manuscripts submitted). Closing dates are determined by each
School, so students should consult with their supervisor and/or the Postgraduate Coordinator
sufficiently in advance of the proposed submission for examination.
30
SUPERVISION OF POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH
Allocation of supervisors
As extracted from the Senate Standing Orders:
The appointment of a Supervisor is the responsibility of the Faculty Committee or panel, and
not of its Chairperson, nor of a Head of School. The Head of a School recommends a
Supervisor for appointment. Where a Supervisor is appointed by a panel, the appointment
must be reported to the next meeting of the Faculty Graduate Studies Committee for
information. Where necessary, in a study of an inter-disciplinary nature, more than one
Supervisor may be appointed. Reasons for nominating a Supervisor must be motivated by the
Head of School. The Head of School is responsible for monitoring the number of higher
degrees students being supervised by an individual staff member to ensure adequate
supervision of candidates and should take this into consideration when recommending a
person for appointment as a Supervisor.
A panel or a Chairperson of a Faculty Graduate Studies Committee can appoint a Supervisor
for an applicant for a research proposal on a temporary basis, subject to approval by the
Graduate Studies Committee at its next meeting.
Except in exceptional circumstances, as approved by the Faculty Graduate Studies Committee,
the Supervisor should have successfully completed a degree at an equivalent level. The Head
of School and Postgraduate Coordinator must be satisfied that the Supervisor has the
appropriate expertise and training to supervise postgraduate students.
Supervision by a member of staff of another university or other structure should be
exceptional. If the Supervisor-designate is not a member of the University staff, a member of
the full-time staff must be appointed as a Co-Supervisor. The University’s policy is that once
it has admitted a candidate, it has an obligation to do its utmost to continue to provide
31
supervision for the minimum period of registration for the degree. Should circumstances
change, and the University finds itself unable to continue to provide supervision, in
exceptional cases, it shall attempt to provide supervision from outside the University, with a
formal Co-Supervisor from within the University. The responsibility for ensuring the adequate
supervision of a candidate by the supervisor rests with the Head of School/Department.
Supervision of one candidate by another
Normally, a candidate for a higher degree who is appointed to supervise another candidate
for a higher degree will be a member of the staff of the University.
A member of staff, who is registered for a higher degree, is permitted to supervise another
candidate at a lower level, or co-supervise a candidate at an equivalent level, provided that
the Supervisor holds a degree at the equivalent level.
Two candidates at the same level may not supervise or co-supervise each other.
Supervision agreement: Statement of principles
The Statement of Principles constitutes a memorandum of understanding of the duties and
expectations of each party in a supervisory relationship. The Statement of Principles must be
discussed with the student, and it may be changed by mutual agreement. It must be signed
by the Supervisor(s) and the student at the start of the supervision process and a copy of the
signed agreement appended to the proposal on submission of the research proposal.
A copy of the supervision agreement, together with the Proposal submission form is available
at:
https://www.wits.ac.za/media/wits-university/faculties-and-
schools/humanities/humanities-faculty-research/postgraduate-
forms/Proposalsubmissionform%20(green).pdf
32
Duties of a Supervisor
It is the responsibility of the Head of School or Postgraduate Coordinator ensure that a
Supervisor is familiar with the University’s and Faculty’s Standing Orders on higher degrees.
These duties are available from the Faculty Registrar. A copy of these duties (and/or relevant
code of responsibility/conduct) along with the appropriate Style Guide, the Policy on
Plagiarism and the University Grievance Procedure for Postgraduate Students as well as the
Statement of Principles must be made available to students at registration, and should form
the basis of a negotiation between the Supervisor/s and the candidate as to how they will
work together.
The duties of the Supervisor shall be:
To meet with the student to establish the scope and feasibility of the proposed research topic
for the relevant programme of study
To discuss the Statement of Principles with the student, which may be changed by mutual
agreement. It must be signed by the Supervisor(s) and the student at the start of the
supervision process.
To report, after consultation with the Head of the School or Postgraduate Coordinator
concerned, any change in the proposed title for the approval of the Assistant Dean of
Postgraduate Studies in the Faculty.
To assist the candidate’s research in all possible ways. The Supervisor should take care to
encourage the candidate to use his or her own initiative, and should not watch over every
detail of the work. He or she should rather make suggestions wherever necessary, and
encourage the candidate to apply them.
To offer feedback timeously on submissions of work in progress as per mutually agreed
timelines that do not hinder the progress of the student’s research. Supervision entails both
oral advice on the candidate’s research, and constructive written comments on drafts of the
proposal and on draft chapters. A record of the supervision process must be kept by the
Supervisor.
To ensure that the candidate knows the conventional requirements and techniques of
presentation for a research report/thesis/dissertation.
To ascertain the cause should the candidate, for any reason, fail to make adequate progress.
If the candidate is at fault and does not - after a written warning - make better progress, the
Supervisor shall bring the matter to the attention of the Head of School or Postgraduate
Coordinator. Any further instruction that emanates from this should also be in writing and if
the candidate, in turn, does not act upon it, the matter should be brought to the attention of
33
the Faculty which may, at that stage, initiate cancellation of registration. It is essential that a
candidate be given the opportunity to put forward his or her case at all stages of this process
before cancellation is decided upon by the Faculty. In cases where there is more than one
Supervisor, the Supervisors shall consult one another on the progress of the candidate at
regular intervals.
To report once a year to the Faculty, or its Chairperson, on the progress of the candidate’s
work. See Progress reports. The Faculty Registrar will monitor the submission of progress
reports and ensure that copies of these reports are filed on the student’s file.
To draw the attention of the candidate to the minimum and maximum periods of study for
the degree.
To nominate examiners, in consultation with the Head of School, a minimum of three months
prior to the submission of the thesis. At this point, the title of the thesis must be confirmed.
Upon the student’s submission for examination, to inform the Faculty of any degree-specific
Examiner Guidelines that are applicable to the degree for which the student is registered. This
is intended to ensure that the student is not disadvantaged by the application of assessment
criteria not designed for his/her programme of study.
To inform the candidate of any planned absences.
Responsibilities of the candidate
The Statement of Principles must be discussed with the Supervisor(s), and must be signed
by the student and the Supervisor(s), and submitted together with the research proposal to
the Faculty Office.
The candidate should meet as frequently as agreed with the Supervisor, and shall, at these
meetings, present a detailed account, in writing, of his or her progress, in a manner as is
acceptable to the field of study being pursued.
The candidate shall take into account all written and oral advice given by the Supervisor,
and provision should be allowed for adequate, mutually respectful discussion around these
recommendations.
The candidate must ensure that the appropriate literature directly pertinent to his or her
chosen topic has been identified and consulted. The candidate has a reasonable expectation
that the Supervisor keep abreast with developments in his or her own area of expertise.
34
Once the focus/area of research is approved, the candidate is responsible for ensuring that
the research remains focused on the agreed areas or, where substantive changes are
necessary, that these are agreed by the candidate and Supervisor, and reported
appropriately to the Faculty Graduate Studies Committee. It should be noted that there
should be appropriate consultation with the Supervisor with respect to changes, especially
where these may lead the work outside of the field of expertise of the Supervisor.
The candidate must obtain the agreement of the Supervisor for any absences
The candidate must produce a written document for examination that meets the
requirements of the degree being pursued.
The candidate must make adequate progress to enable the successful completion of
the degree within the stipulated time frame.
The candidate must bring problems in the supervision relationship to the attention of
the Supervisor in the first instance and, if such problems are not resolved, to bring the
matter to the attention of the Head of School or Postgraduate Coordinator.
The candidate must comply with all administrative processes, including making the
necessary declarations with respect to the work complying with the policies on ethics,
plagiarism and intellectual property.
The candidate shall submit a progress report to the Faculty annually. The Faculty
Registrar is required to monitor the submission of reports and to ensure that copies of
these reports are filed on the student’s file.
FORMS
Faculty forms are available on the Faculty of Humanities website. Click on “Faculty services”,
the “Postgraduate Services”, or click on the web link below:
https://www.wits.ac.za/humanities/faculty-services/postgraduate-services/
35
PROPOSALS
A student’s proposal details the research that he or she plans to undertake, offering a
synopsis of the project and detailing the context and scope of the work. At the Master’s level,
the student’s proposal is assessed by one suitably qualified Reader, while two Readers are
required for independent consideration of work at doctoral level.
Which students are required to submit research proposals?
All students registering for a Master of Arts degree (whether by Coursework and Research
Report or Dissertation), as well as all PhD students, must submit research proposals to the
Faculty Office. At present, the Faculty does not require a proposal at Honours level, although
this process is required internally by Schools.
When are proposals due?
For full-time students, proposals are due approximately six months after registration. Part-
time students are required to submit proposals within one academic year of their
registration.
- Full-time students registering in January must submit proposals by 31 July of that
year.
- Part-time students registering in January must submit proposals by 31 March the
following year.
Note: Students who do not submit their proposals within the specified period may be
discontinued from their programme due to unsatisfactory performance or progress, as per
the Faculty rule 5.7.
What is an acceptable length for a proposal?
Masters by Coursework and Research report proposal must be 3 000 – 4000 words, and
Masters by Dissertation proposal must be 6 000 – 7 000 words, and the Doctorate of
Philosophy proposal must be 8 000 – 10 000 words.
36
How are proposals evaluated, and by whom?
The proposal reading processes accepted by the Graduate Studies Committee can be
classified as either internal or external. The internal system is distinguished by the extent of
the role which the School or discipline plays in the proposal approval system.
The following sub-sections, detailing the internal and external proposal reading systems, have
been provided by the Assistant Dean, who held the “Proposals” portfolio on the Faculty’s
Graduate Studies Committee.
The external (or standard) proposal reading system
1. Schools and disciplines hold departmental proposal presentations to which the
proposed Faculty Reader(s) may or may not be invited.
2. Once the student has revised his/her proposal on the basis of feedback provided at
the presentation, the supervisor decides who s/he believes (or supervisors … believe)
would be an appropriate Reader (or Readers) for the particular student’s proposal and
approaches this Reader to establish his or her availability.
3. Having established the availability of the Reader(s), the supervisor enters his or her
name(s) on the proposal submission form and gives the student permission to submit
the proposal to the Faculty along with the completed proposal submission form
(available from the Faculty office).
4. Once the proposal Reader has been approved by the GSC Proposal Portfolio
holder, the proposal is sent to the nominated and approved Reader by the Faculty
office. The Reader then has two weeks in which to read the proposal and write his
\her report.
The internal proposal reading system
Coordinators of disciplines who wish to continue using, or move to use, the internal system
need to contact the member of the Graduate Studies Committee who holds the proposals
portfolio in advance in order to confirm that the following steps will be followed. The internal
system may NOT be used in the case of doctoral candidates.
1. As soon as students and supervisors start working together, and dates for proposal
presentations in Schools / disciplines have been set, supervisors send the course
37
Coordinator the names of two possible Readers for their students’ proposals, based
on the students’ fields of research.
2. The Course Coordinator should send the list of suggested Readers with the title or
broad area of research for every student to the Faculty Graduate Studies Committee
member who holds the Proposals portfolio.
3. After having received Faculty approval for the Readers nominated the supervisor
should approach the proposed Readers and confirm their availability to attend the
proposal presentation and their willingness to write a comprehensive report on the
student’s proposed research proposal.
4. At the presentation, the approved Reader leads the discussion of the student’s
proposal and gives focused oral or written feedback on it.
5. The student, having considered the Reader’s feedback and improved his or her
proposal, then sends the corrected proposal to the Reader.
6. The Reader writes a report indicating that he/she attended the proposal presentation
session and is satisfied that the completed proposal represents a worthwhile and
viable project. This report should relate directly to the particular proposal being read
and not take the form of a check-list that could apply to any proposal. It should refer
to any suggestions for improvement the Reader made at the presentation and
indicate that these improvements have now been made. (See below)
7. The supervisor attaches the Reader’s report to the student’s proposal. Both
documents, together with the proposal submission form, are sent to the Faculty office.
8. Following consideration by the GSC Proposal Portfolio holder, the student receives
feedback about his / her proposal in writing from Faculty.
9. Any student who does not present his/her proposal during the scheduled
presentation session(s), or whose proposal still needs substantial revision, reverts to
the external system i.e. the proposal is sent to Faculty without a Reader’s report
attached and with the recommended Readers’ names entered on the green proposal
submission form. The Faculty will then send the proposal to the chosen Reader(s) and
await their feedback.
The following are requirements for the successful implementation of the external proposal
reading system:
1. Having approached potential Readers to check their availability, supervisors should list
nominated Readers on page 4 of the proposal submission form – page 3 of the form
38
is for completion by proposal Readers themselves, and should not be completed by
supervisors or students.
2. For proposals at the Master’s level, at least one Reader must be nominated, though
the nomination of a second suitable Reader is recommended. For proposals at the
doctoral level, at least two Readers must be nominated,
3. All Readers must include a short, written report rather than simply writing on the
student’s proposal itself. This report should not take the form of a tick-list that could
apply to any proposal.
4. Where the Reader’s report does not accompany page three of the ‘Proposal
Submission’ form – for example, if the report is sent by e-mail – the report must
clearly communicate the Reader’s decision about the proposal in terms of the four
categories detailed on page three of the form (that is, whether the proposal is
accepted, accepted on the understanding that the candidate will take note of the
Reader’s recommendations, accepted in principle with some clarification needed, or
unacceptable as it stands).
Disagreements between proposal Readers about the quality of a student’s submission are
addressed by the GSC Proposal Portfolio holder.
The following steps are requirements for the successful implementation of the internal
proposal reading system in particular:
1. On the basis of a motivation from the relevant supervisor and course Coordinator, the
GSC Proposal Portfolio holder must have approved the particular Reader(s) for each
student in advance of the school / departmental presentation.
2. Where a proposal is submitted to the Faculty together with a Reader’s report (as per
(7), above), this report must indicate:
- that the Reader attended the student’s presentation,
- what oral or written feedback was given to the student at, or after, the
presentation (i.e. what the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal were at this
stage; what revisions were suggested or required; etc.)
39
- whether the version of the proposal sent to the Faculty office is `approved’ or
`approved in principle’ (no proposal can be sent to the Faculty with a Reader’s
report attached unless it falls into either of these categories). See 7 above.
How are students informed of the outcome of the proposal evaluation process?
Immediately following the return of a completed Reader’s report to the Faculty office, and the
evaluation of the report by the designated GSC member, the Faculty office will contact the
student and supervisor in writing by email to convey the outcome of the proposal process.
The Faculty Officer will update the student’s milestones as per the proposal outcome.
Students and supervisors must ensure that their proposals are approved and that this has
been recorded by the Faculty even in cases where the Reader asks for minor alterations to be
made to the satisfaction of the supervisor.
Ethics Clearance Requirements
Students must apply for University Ethics clearance for their proposed research during the
proposal stage and obtain an ethics clearance number to be indicated on the proposal as well
as on the examination submission documents. Research must comply with the requirements
for ethics and biosafety clearance; this is available on the University Research Website and is
updated regularly. The weblink is:
http://web.wits.ac.za/Academic/Research/Home.htm. A student may not continue with his/her
research until ethical clearance is received from the Research Office.
Students are advised to apply sufficiently early in the proposal writing process as s/he may be
required to undergo ethics training.
HREC (NON-MEDICAL)
All research activities under the auspices of the University of the Witwatersrand require ethics
clearance from the HREC (non-medical) if it involves human and/or animal participants, or if
the research includes social, educational and/or psychological behaviour or perceptions. This
excludes research activities at a medical facility; e.g. hospitals, clinics, research labs,
pharmacies, etc. in which case see HREC (MEDICAL) below.
40
The role of the Ethics committee is to monitor the ethics of research protocols in the
Humanities and Social Sciences, i.e. the risks and benefits to the informant or subject. The
committee is responsible for looking at critical factors such as the extent to which research
could be socially or psychologically invasive or damaging. (Research involving physically
invasive techniques is scrutinized by the HREC (Medical) as set out in item 1 above).
The HREC (Non-Medical) role is to ensure that all research in which humans are involved as
participants, whether as informants, subjects (carried out in the University by undergraduates,
postgraduates, staff or affiliated staff in the name of the University) or performers (as, for
example, a research study involving a dramatic production) respects the rights of individuals
and that:
the informant or subject has consented to the research without coercion;
the questions posed are not insulting or embarrassing;
confidential matters that could place the informant in an embarrassing, false or
compromising position vis-à-vis authorities, are handled circumspectly;
the privacy and wishes of informants are respected, i.e. anonymity of the informant is
maintained if required;
the informant is informed as fully as possible as to the aims and possible implications
of the research.
The Committee's procedures include the scrutinizing of any protocols referred to it by the
higher degrees committees of a Faculty; by heads of Schools in respect of undergraduate or
Honours level researchers; by funding committees (e.g. Richard Ward or Life Sciences
Screening Committee); or by an individual researcher (staff or student).
The Committee is also required to scrutinize any research instrument (e.g. a questionnaire)
planned by the researcher to preclude the use of embarrassing or insulting questions.
If the Chairman of the HREC (Non-Medical) feels the proposal referred to that Committee is
more relevant to the HREC (Medical) it will be redirected to the latter Committee.
The Committee may delegate to the Chairperson the power to act in urgent cases.
HREC (MEDICAL)
All research activities under the auspices of the University of the Witwatersrand requires
ethics clearance for research involving human participants. The rule of thumb is that any staff
or students from the Faculty of Health Sciences (FHS) must submit an application for ethics
clearance to the HREC (Medical) if the research involves any human participants. If the
41
proposed research is undertaken at a medical facility (hospital or clinic, etc.) with/out medical
professionals then an application for ethics clearance must be submitted to the HREC
(Medical).
Extract as per the National Health Act:
These guidelines ‘Ethics in Health Research: Principles, Processes and Structures – 2015’
provide an updated and strengthened guide to ensure that, in South Africa, research is
conducted responsibly and ethically. Mandated by s 72 of the National Health Act 61 of 2003,
the National Health Research Ethics Council (NHREC) tasked its Working Group for Norms
and Standards to produce a revision of the first edition of the Guidelines issued in 2004.
Drawing on international and foreign national ethics codes and research ethics guidelines, in
addition to the first edition of these Guidelines, the NHREC has endeavoured to produce a
locally relevant document that fits with the matrix of research ethics guidelines available
across borders.
The basic expectations of the Guidelines include that
• Proposals to conduct research involving humans undergo independent ethics review
before the research begins
• Proposed health research promote health, contribute to prevention of communicable
or non-communicable diseases or disability or result in cures or alleviation of suffering
• Proposals to conduct health research stand up to scientfic and ethical scrutiny
appropriate to the disciplines concerned
• Harm to research participants is prevented or at least minimised and balanced against
the likelihood of benefit
• The safety and welfare interests of animals used in research are promoted
• Researchers are accountable for their research activities
• Social and ethical values are promoted
Research with humans
• The National Health Act (NHA s 72(6)(c)) gives authority to the NHREC for setting
norms and standards for health and health-related research that involves humans.
• Every organisation/institution, health agency and health establishment at which health
and health-related research involving human participants is conducted, must establish
or have access to a registered Human Research Ethics Committee (REC) (NHA s 73(1)).
42
• RECs that review research involving human participants must register with the NHREC
(NHA s 73(1)).
Ethical research review
The NHA (s 72(1)) requires that proposals to conduct ‘health research’ must undergo
independent ethics review before the research commences.
Ethics review of proposed ‘health research’ must be conducted by an REC or AREC
that is registered with the NHREC (s 73(2) of the NHA).
RECs must review ‘health research’ proposals and protocols to ensure that the
research will promote health, contribute to prevention of communicable or non-
communicable diseases or disability or result in cures or alleviation of suffering caused
by communicable or non-communicable diseases or disability (NHA s 73(2)(a)).
RECs must ensure that research proposals stand up to scientific and ethical scrutiny
appropriate to the disciplines concerned.
RECs must review research proposals and protocols prospectively to ensure that they
meet the accepted ethical norms and standards before research commences, using
these Guidelines as a minimum benchmark (NHA s 73(2)(b)).
The review process entails an independent and objective assessment of the potential
effect of the proposed research on potential participants and on the general day-to-
day functioning of the infrastructure that provides the site or context for the research.
Ethics review is not about obstructing scientific progress or innovative research.
Promoting ethical conduct of research entails co-operation between RECs and
researchers to ensure a comprehensive and frank assessment of the ethical
implications of proposals so that participants (and researchers) can be protected
appropriately.
The review must ensure that ethical and scientific standards are maintained to:
protect participants from harm by weighing the risks of harm against the
likelihood of benefit by minimising risks of harm to the extent possible and then
by balancing the risk of harm relative to the likelihood of benefit
protect the safety and welfare of animals used in research by ensuring close
adherence to the expected benchmarks
hold researchers accountable for the research activities
promote important social and ethical values.
In weighing risk of harm against likelihood of benefit, the analysis is concerned not
only with current participants or research animals themselves but also with societal
interests and future hypothetical beneficiaries.
Retrospective review and approval or clearance is not permitted.
43
For more information regarding research ethics and clearance, please visit:
https://www.wits.ac.za/research/researcher-support/research-ethics/
Progress reports
The purpose of the progress reports is to track the development of the student’s work and to
facilitate the timely completion of theses and dissertations. Each complete set of progress
reports consists of contributions from both student and supervisor. Students and supervisors
should complete reports individually allowing each to reflect on the student’s progress and
facilitating discussion about any challenges faced by either party with respect to the student’s
work, conduct or progress.
Who must submit a progress report?
All students registered for the Master’s degree and Doctor of Philosophy are required to
submit progress reports. Supervisors working with students registered for these degrees are
also required to submit progress reports about each of their students. Students registered for
the Master of Arts by Coursework and Research Report and their supervisors, are not required
to submit progress reports; their progress however is monitored by the respective Schools.
When are progress reports sent to supervisors and students, and when are they due
back?
Progress report forms are sent to both supervisors and students in June or in July of each
year, and are due back approximately four weeks thereafter. The deadline for the return of
progress reports is detailed in the e-mail to which the progress report itself is attached.
How are progress reports sent to supervisors and students?
Progress reports are emailed to supervisors, as well as students. I-Wits e-mail addresses are
used exclusively, so students need to check their I-Wits e-mail addresses regularly.
44
How are progress reports returned?
Completed progress reports should be submitted to the Faculty office by the deadline
stipulated via e-mail or by hand to the appropriate Postgraduate Faculty Officer.
How are progress reports evaluated?
Following submission, progress reports are reviewed by senior Graduate Studies Committee
members. The Postgraduate Coordinator of each School will ensure that supervisors of
students whose progress is delayed or seemingly problematic are consulted; further
information and possible interventions may be offered to facilitate the student’s academic
development. Where appropriate, the student in question is invited to elaborate on his or her
progress report.
45
THE EXAMINATION PROCESS
Nomination of Examiners
In advance of a student’s submission of his / her research report, dissertation or thesis for
examination, the supervisor must complete a Faculty Nomination of Examiners form
(available from the Faculty office in electronic format), and return the form to the Faculty
office for approval by the Examiner Nominations Committee.
When are nomination forms due?
Completed nomination forms must be returned to the Faculty office at least four weeks
before the student’s work is due to be submitted.
Submitted nomination forms must be emailed to the Postgraduate Faculty Officer or via the
School’s Postgraduate Administrator with the required accompanying documents, usually the
nominated examiner’s CV. Nominations must include a clear motivation that identifies how
the proposed examiner’s areas of expertise are relevant for examination of the research.
Incomplete nomination forms will not be accepted by the Faculty.
The Faculty Officer will submit the examiner nomination/s to the Examiner Nominations
Committee for approval. Queries or concerns will be communicated to the supervisor.
What qualifies a person to act as an examiner?
Generally, nominated examiners are expected to have published work related to the field of
the work under examination and to hold qualifications at least equivalent to the qualification
sought by the student under examination. However, these requirements may be relaxed in
the examination of work undertaken in emerging disciplines, in disciplines where suitable
examiners are more likely to be individuals with extensive practical experience in the field,
and in other extraordinary cases.
Suitable examiners for a Research Report submitted in partial fulfillment for the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts by Coursework and Research Report
The Research Report is undertaken in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts by Coursework and Research Report. An academic who has acted in a
supervisory or co-supervisory capacity in respect of a particular student’s research is, in the
46
normal course of events, not eligible to act as an appointed internal examiner of that work. In
exceptional circumstances, if the nominated internal examiner has to be the candidate’s
research supervisor, this must be strongly motivated and must be approved by the
Humanities Graduate Studies Committee.
In addition to the internal examiner, one examiner external to the University, who is suitably
qualified and who has not been in the employ of the University for at least two years
preceding the date of nomination, must be nominated to examine the research report.
Suitable examiners for a Dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Arts by Dissertation
An academic who has acted in a supervisory or co-supervisory capacity in respect of a
particular student’s work is not eligible to act as an appointed examiner of that work if the
work is undertaken in fulfillment of a Master of Arts by Dissertation. Two suitably qualified
examiners, one of whom may be in the employ of the University, and may be in the same
division, department or school as the supervisor and candidate, must be nominated to
examine the student’s work.
Suitable examiners for a Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
An academic who has acted in a supervisory or co-supervisory capacity in respect of a
particular student’s work is not eligible to act as an appointed examiner of that work if the
work is undertaken in fulfillment of a PhD. Rather, three suitably qualified examiners, one of
whom may be in the employ of the University, must be nominated to examine the student’s
work. At least one of the appointed examiners will usually work outside of South Africa.
Internal examiners
How do supervisors nominate internal examiners for work submitted in fulfillment of a
Master of Arts by Dissertation / PhD?
All examiner nominations must be submitted to the relevant Faculty Officer, preferably via the
Postgraduate Coordinator or Postgraduate Administrator of the relevant programme.
47
A non-supervisory internal examiner must be approved by the Examiner Nominations sub-
committee of the GSC. However, the nomination form for the proposed non-supervisory
internal examiner does not need to include curriculum vitae (as it required in respect of an
external examiner who has not previously been approved, or whose approval has lapsed).
A non-supervisory internal examiner, who has been approved as an examiner within the five
years preceding the current nomination, may be appointed without the approval of the
appropriate sub-committee of the GSC.
External examiners
How do supervisors nominate external examiners for work submitted in partial
fulfillment of a Master of Arts by Coursework and Research Report, or work submitted
in fulfillment of a Master of Arts by Dissertation / PhD?
All examiner nominations must be submitted to the relevant Faculty Officer, preferably via the
Postgraduate Coordinator or Postgraduate Administrator of the relevant programme.
External examiners are defined as examiners not currently employed by the University and
who have not been employed by the University for at least two years preceding their
nomination. External examiners who have not examined for the Faculty in the five years
preceding their current nomination, or who have never been appointed as examiners for the
Faculty, require approval by the appropriate sub-committee of the GSC prior to their
appointment.
A supervisor who wants to nominate as an external examiner an academic who has not
previously acted as a Faculty examiner, or whose appointment occurred five years or longer
before the present nomination, must include a current curriculum vitae for that external
examiner. This must be submitted with the nomination form with a clear motivation
addressing the specific qualifications, expertise and/or experience of the nominee that makes
him/her a suitable examiner for the relevant research study.
A proposed external examiner, who has been approved as an examiner within the five years
preceding the present nomination, may be appointed without further approval.
48
How do I know whether an examiner has been approved by the GSC, and whether this
approval is still valid?
The Faculty office maintains a record of approved examiners, together with the date of each
examiner’s approval, and is currently expanding these records to include details of examiners’
fields of expertise, which includes the number of students examined by each examiner as well
as special conditions relating to the appointment of any examiner.
The Faculty Office also endeavours to keep a record of examiners who have in the past
proved unreliable, tardy or unreasonable in their expectations as examiners. A supervisor who
wishes to nominate such an examiner will be advised of the examiner’s status upon
submission of the nomination form. Supervisors may contact the Faculty Office (as per the
contact details above) with any concerns about the status of examiners.
Can proposal Readers act as examiners?
Yes. An academic who has evaluated the proposal prepared by a particular student in
developing his / her work towards its final version is eligible to act as an appointed examiner.
Examiner guidelines
Postgraduate coordinators and administrators should ensure that Faculty officers are
(a) provided with School and Faculty-approved examiner guidelines for all programmes of
study for which the standard Faculty guidelines do not apply, and
(b) notified at the time of submission which discipline- or programme-specific examiner
guidelines must be sent out to examiners. This process will ensure that students are not
inadvertently disadvantaged by the use of assessment criteria that are not applicable for their
specific programmes of study.
Submission of research reports, dissertations and theses for
examination
An MA / PhD student must submit a complete final draft of his / her work to the Faculty
office by the due date, together with a completed Supervisor’s Consent Form (available from
the Faculty office).
49
If a student elects to submit his/her work for examination without the approval of his/her
supervisor, this must be clearly indicated on the Supervisor’s Consent Form.
Submission deadlines
What is the due date for research reports, dissertations and theses?
Unless a student has applied for and been granted an extension of time to complete his / her
work, the following deadlines apply:
MA (Coursework and Research Report), MA
(Dissertation) – full time
One year after initial registration
MA (Coursework and Research Report), MA
(Dissertation) – part time
Two years after initial registration
PhD – full time Two – five years after initial registration
PhD – part time Two – six years after initial registration
The 15 February submission date is currently the most popular. Students, who are unable to
submit by this date, may apply for a one month concessionary extension until 15 March at no
additional cost; such application must be submitted to the Faculty at least six weeks prior to
the February submission date.
If the student’s application for an extension is successful, s/he is not liable for payment of a
research extension fee. However, if the student is unable to complete and submit the research
in the specified time (N+1), s/he will only be allowed to submit the work for examination
upon registration for the entire academic year and will be liable for payment of all associated
fees, unless s/he submit the research by the end of June in that academic year (N+1), at
which time a 50% fee rebate will be granted to the student. Such a rebate will also apply to
the tuition fee for international students.
N.B: Research extensions of less than one year do not apply to coursework components of
study for higher degrees.
50
How many copies of the work must a student submit?
A student submitting work in fulfillment or partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Arts
by Coursework and Research Report or Master of Arts by Dissertation must submit two
bound copies of their work, as well as a complete copy on CD (including all appendices and
related data). A student submitting work in fulfillment of the Doctor of Philosophy degree
must submit three bound copies of his / her work, as well as a complete copy on CD
(including all appendices and related data).
Each student must obtain a receipt acknowledging his / her submission to the Faculty Office.
What else needs to be submitted, besides the research report / dissertation / thesis?
In addition to his / her work, each student must submit a completed Submission of Research
Report, Dissertation or Thesis form and the Supervisor’s Consent form available from the
Faculty office. Submission forms are also available at:
https://www.wits.ac.za/humanities/faculty-services/postgraduate-services/
Supervisor’s responsibility on submission of work for examination
As per the University Standing Orders on Higher degrees, Supervisors must report on the
supervision process:
The Supervisor should comment on the supervision process (frequency of meetings,
any difficulties in the relationship, time frames, concerns about plagiarism, and other
pertinent information regarding the supervision process and the work being
submitted, etc.)
There should be an assessment of the student's ability to work independently at the
different stages of the project: selection of the topic, the literature review, data
collection and data analysis.
The Supervisor should report on any relevant conferences attended by the student
and the student's publications.
51
In the case of joint publications, there should be a clear statement of what section of
the work was done by each of the authors of each joint publication included in the
dissertation or thesis.
The Supervisor should draw the Faculty’s attention to any personal difficulties
experienced by the student (death in the family, illness etc.).
Supervisors should briefly assess the quality of the dissertation or thesis. This assessment
should include:
An assessment on the quality of the written expression and presentation.
An assessment of the contribution that the research makes to knowledge in the field.
An assessment of the standard of the work.
Further, each student is asked to submit a form, which is available from the Faculty office,
confirming that his / her proposal has been accepted. This requirement is designed to
prevent students from submitting final drafts of projects that have not successfully passed
through the proposal process.
Under what circumstances can a student submit without the permission of his / her
supervisor?
The implications of a student submitting his/her work for examination without the
supervisor’s consent are potentially significant for the examination process. Students and
supervisors alike are urged to be aware of the following:
- A student can be said to submit without the consent of the supervisor when the
supervisory relationship has deteriorated, and/or if the supervisor believes that the
work is not ready for submission whereas the student does.
A supervisor whose student submits work for examination without consent may not act as an
internal examiner for the work submitted. A suitably qualified substitute must be appointed
to examine the work by the Head of School.
52
The supervisor must submit a report explaining why s/he feels that the work is not suitable
for examination; however, her/his reservations should not be communicated to the
potential/nominated examiners. The report will be made available in the case of an ad hoc
committee called to resolve discrepancies in marks awarded or of failure of the research
component. The student must complete the “submission without supervisor’s consent” form
at the Faculty Office.
Following successful submission of MA or PhD research, a student’s research work is sent to
the approved examiners for evaluation by email or courier.
How long does the examination process last?
Examiners of MA-level work are given six weeks to read a student’s work and offer a
response; at PhD level, an eight-week examination period is expected.
The Faculty officer will e-mail the internal and external examiner confirming receipt of the
research two days after dispatch.
A week before the due date for the return of a report, each examiner is sent a reminder by
the Faculty officer. Any examiner whose report is still outstanding after the due date is
contacted by the Dean with a request to submit the evaluations within a one-week period.
These timeframes are however, dependent upon the successful and timely nomination of
examiners (as outlined above) – student work cannot be sent to examiners unless the
nomination process has been successfully completed.
How are documents sent to examiners?
Student work is couriered to examiners or emailed following submission, together with one
copy each of the applicable Examiner’s Forms, Guidelines for Examiners, and Vendor
(Payment Claim) Forms. Additional documents (for example, programme- or department-
53
specific guidelines for examiners, which the Faculty office helps to distribute) will also be
included.
Examiners have the option of receiving all of this material electronically. However, the Faculty
office will not incur expenses resulting from any examiner’s choosing to print partial or
complete copies of a student’s work during or after the examination process.
How does a supervisor know the status of a student’s work?
Supervisors, course coordinators and students enquiring about progress with the examination
of a research report, thesis or dissertation are welcome to contact the Faculty Office for
information (as per the contact details on page 4).
Extension Requests for Submission of Research for Examination
Masters of Arts by Coursework and Research Report
A student who is not ready to complete and submit his/her research report by 15 February of
the year following the initial registration, and who requires additional time to complete
his/her research, must apply for an extension for one additional month and submit the work
for examination by March 15. If additional time is required, an extension must be requested,
and the student must register for another full year and pay the necessary fees. A partial
refund may be awarded if the student submits for examination by June 30. To apply for an
extension, the student must complete the Faculty amendment form and include a motivation
from the student and the supervisor; both must agree that the research report will be
submitted to Faculty for examination by the revised approved deadline.
Masters of Arts by Dissertation and Doctor of Philosophy
A student who is not ready to complete and submit his/her research report by 15 February of
the year following the initial registration, and who requires additional time to complete
his/her research, must apply for an extension for one additional month and submit the work
for examination by March 15. If additional time is required, an extension must be requested,
54
and the student must register for another full year and pay the necessary fees. A partial
refund may be awarded if the student submits for examination by June 30. To apply for an
extension, the student must complete the Faculty amendment form including a motivation
from the student and the supervisor/s; they must both agree that the dissertation/thesis will
be submitted to Faculty for examination by the approved deadline.
Procedures following the return of examiners’ reports
Following the return of all the examiners’ forms and reports to the Faculty office, the reports
are considered in relation to one another by the Assistant Dean for Graduate Studies, who
ensures that the reports are cogent, fair and systematically presented. Where reports reveal a
discrepancy between the examiners’ evaluations of 15% or more the Assistant Dean will seek
guidance from colleagues on a suitable course of action in the form of an ad hoc meeting
that is held electronically or in person.
What happens after examiners’ forms and reports are returned to Faculty?
Following their return, examiners’ evaluations are processed as follows:
1. Following the submission of two examiners’ reports (in the event of the examination
of Master’s-level work) or three examiners’ reports (in the event of the examination of
PhD work), copies of all the examiners’ reports are sent to the Assistant Dean for
Graduate Studies (or a Vice-Chair of the Graduate Studies Committee) for evaluation,
together with a record of the student coursework marks (where applicable). Unless
exceptional circumstances require it, the Assistant Dean will not evaluate reports for
work submitted within his or her discipline.
2. If examiners’ reports are consonant, the Assistant Dean will use the results
recommended by the examiners to reach a decision on the final result to be awarded
and the corrections to be undertaken.
3. If an evaluation of the examiners’ reports reveals a discrepancy between the
examiners regarding any aspect of the work which the Assistant Dean understands to
be significant and / or outside the scope of his / her professional expertise, but which
does not warrant convening an ad hoc committee, the Assistant Dean may choose to
circulate the examiners’ reports either to a sub-committee of the Graduate Studies
Committee, or to any suitably qualified member(s) of staff working in the field within
which the student’s work has been undertaken.
55
Under what circumstances is the Graduate Studies Committee required to hold an ad
hoc meeting about a student’s work?
In terms of Senate standing orders, the Assistant Dean is obliged to convene an ad hoc
committee in the event that submitted examiners’ reports give rise to any of the following
situations:
- a discrepancy between examiners’ evaluations, consisting primarily in a significant
disagreement between the examiners as to the value or integrity of the student’s
work, the soundness of the methodology used, or any other aspect of the work
which causes any appointed examiner to call into question the work’s contribution
to knowledge
- If the work examined was submitted for the degree of Master of Arts by
Coursework and Research report and Master of Arts by Dissertation, the
recommendation by any one examiner that the degree be awarded with
distinction where another appointed examiner has expressed his / her strong
opposition to the award of a distinction.
- If the work examined was submitted for the degree of Master of Arts by
Coursework and Research Report, a difference of fifteen per cent (15%) or more
between the marks awarded by the appointed examiners.
- If the work examined was for a PhD and there are significant discrepancies
between the examiners’ evaluations an ad hoc meeting will be convened.
The Ad hoc process
Where the Assistant Dean is obliged by Senate Standing Orders to convene an ad hoc
meeting, but reasonably believes that the discrepancy in examiners’ responses to a particular
work does not reflect fundamental and irreconcilable differences between examiners, he or
she may convene an ad hoc meeting by electronic circulation.
What are the procedural requirements for a hoc meeting?
Ad hoc meetings can be convened as face-to-face discussions or by electronic circulation.
Each of these is discussed below.
56
Ad hoc meetings by electronic circulation
1. The Faculty officer so designated will email potential committee members (as
nominated by the Assistant Dean) to inform them of the projected circulation and to
determine their availability to participate. An ad hoc committee is quorate when it
includes the Assistant Dean (as chairperson) or his/her nominee and two academics
whose own expertise qualifies them to engage with the topic of the student’s work.
2. Following this, an e-mail will be sent to all available committee members with two
attachments: a copy of all the examiners’ reports, and a document entitled “Ad hoc
committee by circulation”. The latter will contain information about the reason for
calling the ad hoc meeting, and include an assessment of the student’s work as all as
any information on the supervision process that may help the committee in its
deliberations by the student’s supervisor, as well as a preliminary recommendation by
the committee chair.
3. Committee members are then requested to offer short responses to the documents
provided, and to raise any concerns they may have about the marks awarded, the
supervisor’s comments, or the chair’s preliminary recommendation.
4. All comments are collated by the designated Faculty officer and sent to the
committee chair for a final decision.
5. Committee members are then contacted with details of the decision. In certain
circumstances, this may lead to further consultation and some revision of the original
decision.
Face-to-face ad hoc meetings
In situations where the Assistant Dean is obliged by the Senate Standing Orders to convene
an ad hoc meeting, and his / her reading of the examiners’ reports leads him / her to
conclude that the discrepancies in the examiners’ responses are due to fundamental
disparities in their approaches to the student’s work, based on, for example their
paradigmatic assumptions or ideological positions, a face-to-face ad hoc meeting will be
convened.
1. The Faculty officer so designated will e-mail the supervisor whose student’s work is
the subject of the ad hoc meeting, and confirm his / her availability to attend a
57
meeting at the Faculty office within the week. Any supervisor who is unable to attend
an ad hoc meeting is encouraged to submit a report on his / her student’s work, and
to respond to the contents of all the examiners’ reports.
2. The Faculty officer so designated will e-mail potential committee members (as
nominated by the Assistant Dean or his/her alternate) to inform them of the projected
ad hoc meeting and to determine their availability to participate. An ad hoc
committee is quorate when it includes the Assistant Dean (as chairperson) or his/her
nominee and two academics whose own expertise qualifies them to engage with topic
of the student’s work.
3. This e-mail will include a copy of all the examiners’ reports, and will detail the
student’s coursework marks (if any).
4. During the committee meeting, the chairperson will lead the discussion of the
examiners’ reports, and seek to identify possible outcomes that fairly reflect the
quality of the work under consideration. (The supervisor is not normally present
during this discussion.)
5. The supervisor is then invited to offer his or her response to the examiners’ reports,
and to comment on the supervision of the student’s work. Committee members may
address questions to the supervisor and thereby clarify their understanding of the
matter under consideration.
6. By the end of the meeting, the committee will have agreed upon a practical solution
to the differences between examiners’ assessments – for example, the committee may
decide, in light of their discussions, what mark ought to be awarded to the work;
whether revisions need to be undertaken, and how substantial these ought to be;
whether or not re-examination is required; or whether any other form of action ought
to be taken.
Revisions after Examination
What kinds of revisions are acceptable at Master’s and PhD levels?
In most instances, examiners will specify minor corrections to be undertaken by students prior
to the final submission of their work to the Faculty office; these corrections typically involve
amendments to the use of language, grammar, referencing and minor technical aspects of
the work.
58
It is expected that the student should complete minor corrections within two weeks of
receiving feedback from his or her supervisor regarding the corrections to be undertaken.
Unless exceptional circumstances require otherwise, most stipulations of major revisions
should not involve more than six months of sustained work. Students will be expected to pay
additional fees if their work is not submitted within the designated period.
A student may be required to resubmit his or her work for re-examination. The requirements
for re-examination will vary depending on the specific recommendations made by the
Assistant Dean for Graduate Studies, drawing on the recommendation of the appointed
examiners. A student will be required to pay a re-examination fee as per the University Fees
booklet.
As extracted from the Senate Standing Orders:
Revision
Candidates are entitled to appropriate supervision while revising theses in response to
examiners’ reports. Revision shall be done within a maximum period of six months, unless
application for a further extension is supported by the Faculty Graduate Studies Committee.
Faculties will not require students to pay additional fees if revision is completed within three
months. Beyond that, candidates will be required to pay all fees. Failure to submit at the end
of the period allowed for revision may result in termination of candidature.
How is the student informed of the outcome of the examination process?
Once the Assistant Dean is satisfied that the student’s work has been fairly considered, and
that due processes have been followed, the Faculty office contacts the student by e-mail to
convey the results of the examination process. The supervisor and head of discipline are
informed electronically. The electronic letter sent to the student further details any conditions
attaching to the award of the degree, such as corrections or revisions to be undertaken.
Awaiting Examiner Grants
Doctoral students (only) are invited to apply for the Awaiting Examiners Grant through their
School or department’s Postgraduate Coordinator when submitting the PhD for examination.
The Awaiting Examiner’s grant is intended to assist doctoral students to draft an article for
publication from the PhD – a requirement for graduation. Six months after being awarded the
59
grant, doctoral students must submit a report to the school PhD/PG coordinator detailing
how the grant was used and the publications resulting (or manuscripts submitted). Closing
dates are determined by each School, so students should consult with their supervisor and/or
the Postgraduate Coordinator sufficiently in advance of the proposed submission for
examination.
Coursework Examination
Procedures following the examination of coursework material by internal and external
examiners – the Board of Examiners meeting
By December each year, the coursework results of all students who have undertaken
coursework during the academic year are considered by a Board of Examiners consisting of
representatives of each School that has presented candidates.
What material is considered by the Board of Examiners?
Results sent to the Board of Examiners should in the normal course of events, have been
considered, approved or amended (as appropriate) by the external examiners appointed by
the disciplines or programmes. At postgraduate level, all Honours results and Master’s
(Coursework and Research Report) coursework results are considered by the Board.
When does the Board of Examiners meeting take place?
The Board of Examiners’ meeting should be held no later than December; however, Schools
or programmes wishing to hold their Board meetings earlier can be accommodated and
should contact the Faculty Registrar to make appropriate arrangements. In fact, the Faculty
strongly supports the convening of Boards in December, immediately after the conclusion of
the academic session.
60
GRADUATION PROCESSES
How are students selected for Graduation?
Students who meet the requirements of the degree and are qualified will be placed in a
graduation ceremony.
Students must ensure that their fees are paid at least 6 weeks before the graduation cluster.
Please note that students with “holds” will be removed from the graduation lists and will only
be considered for a future graduation ceremony provided they sign the “acknowledgement
of debt” form with the Fees office.
At least six weeks prior to a Graduation ceremony, students must check in with the Faculty
office to confirm their person details and field of study as this information will reflect on their
degree certificates.
Students can visit the link below to get more information on Graduation.
http://www.wits.ac.za/graduations/
STEPS TO FOLLOW PRIOR TO GRADUATION CEREMONIES
The Faculty Office strives to ensure that all students graduate without any problems.
Please take note of the following steps that need to take place upon completion of your
degree but at no later than six weeks prior to the graduation cluster.
Ensure that full names are reflected on the student system, in the correct order and
they are spelt correctly.
Ensure that the Faculty has the correct field of study on the student system.
Ensure that the Faculty also has the correct postal address and personal email
address.
Ensure that there are no outstanding fees or library holds preventing graduation.
Log in to the I-Wits student email account, and the Exams and Graduation Office
website for graduation information.
Students’ names must appear on the graduation list in order for students to graduate.
61
Ensure that the graduation guide is received from the Graduation Office regarding
graduation protocol. http://www.wits.ac.za/graduations
Please note that no flash photography is allowed during the ceremony (i.e. cellphones,
cameras) and no children under seven years of age are allowed in the venue.
The onus remains with the student to ensure that the information provided to the Faculty is
correct. Failure to do so will result in an incorrect degree certificate. If the degree certificate
is incorrect, students will need to request a re-issue of a degree certificate from the
Graduation Office and graduands will be liable for the associated costs if amendments are
not submitted timeously.
62
OTHER IMPORTANT AND/OR USEFUL INFORMATION
Humanities Graduate Centre
The Humanities Graduate Centre (HGC) is located within the Faculty of Humanities on the
Ground Floor of the South West Engineering Building (SWE) next to the Great Hall. As a
resource for postgraduates, it houses doctoral fellows from all the Schools, Departments,
Centres and Institutes in the Faculty of Humanities.
The Centre also offers a seminar room and computer labs for Masters students, and acts as a
networking hub for junior postgraduates and senior PhDs.
The HGC provides an intellectually enriching, academically- enabling and socially supportive
environment for postgraduate students in the Wits Faculty of Humanities. It hosts seminars
on a wide variety of topics, academic writing and research methods workshops, and a variety
of other events which are academically, culturally and intellectually enriching.
The Centre is conveniently located close to various service points, such as the various Schools
in the Humanities’ schools, departments, cafeterias and the bus terminus for inter-campus
commuters. Notices of upcoming events and opportunities are posted on the HGC website:
https://www.wits.ac.za/humanities/faculty-services/humanities-graduate-centre/ feel free to
visit the Centre and sign up to be included in the Centre’s mailing list.
University Accommodation
The Office of Residence Life, on the ground floor of Senate House, is responsible for
overseeing all aspects of the University's residence programme, including accommodation
and meals, and the provision of recreational facilities and programmes for the improved
academic performance and the holistic development of students within a residential
environment.
The office is also responsible for limited staff and visitor accommodation, as well as
conference information. For more information you can contact
[email protected] or +27 11 717 9170/2/3/4
63
Johannesburg at a glance
Johannesburg has all the modern amenities of a large metropolitan region (population over 7
million), including fascinating cultural attractions, art galleries, museums, shopping, and
restaurants. The city's vibrancy is a reflection of the diversity of its people and its often
turbulent history. South Africa has 11 official national languages and many cultures; visitors to
Johannesburg can see influences of the African Zulu, Xhosa, Swazi, Tswana, Tsonga, Venda,
Khoi and San, as well as Dutch Afrikaners, English, Indian, Portuguese, Malay and other
immigrant cultures.
Population: estimated 4.4 million in 2016
Names: Johannesburg, Egoli, Jozi, Joburg, Joey’s, City of Gold (Gold discovered in
1886)
Johannesburg is the only designated global city in Africa
It is the largest and most populous city in South Africa
Johannesburg is the provincial capital of the Gauteng Province
It is the seat of the Constitutional Court (walking distance from Wits) and the
Apartheid Museum ( a15 min. drive from Wits)
Johannesburg is the financial, economic and cultural centre of South Africa. Generates
17% of South Africa’s wealth
Major industries: Mining, Banking, ICT, Retail
South African Rand is the currency used. One Rand=100 cents. All major credit cards
are accepted
City is divided into seven regions
There are 7 public hospitals and 32 private hospitals and clinics
Tap water is safe in SA and Johannesburg water is rated amongst the best in the world
but if you prefer bottled water it is widely available
Johannesburg is the only metropolitan city in the world that is not located on a major
waterway
Gauteng has 5,600 km of tarred roads and highways
The city is 1,753 m above sea level and is second only to Mexico City in height above
sea
Average temperature is 16.2 C (62 F) but temperatures can reach up to 30 C (86 F).
There are on average 3,182 hours of sunshine annually
There is an average range of hours of sunshine in JHB of between 7.4 hours per day in
March and 9.7 hours per day in August
604 mm of rain is the average for the year with January being the wettest month and
July the driest
Hillbrow Tower is the highest structure in Johannesburg at 269 m
64
There are 25 museums across the city
104 recreation centres
1 main library and 82 regional and suburban libraries
21 golf courses
58 swimming pools of which 4 are permanently closed
Johannesburg has approximately 6 million trees making it the largest human-made
forest in the world
Johannesburg is twinned with Birmingham (UK) and New York (USA)
Safety
Taking care of yourself in Johannesburg involves a few basic rules which should never be
broken.
Carry your medical aid card and a certified copy of your passport at all times.
Never walk alone at night.
Do not wear expensive jewellery.
Do not flash large and expensive cameras in the streets.
Do not carry large sums of money.
Do not talk on your cell phone whilst walking in the street.
When driving a car keep your car doors locked at all times.
Keep some money in a clear plastic container so that if mugged you can throw it on
the ground away from you to give yourself time to get away.
Do not try and resist someone holding you up for your money or valuables – you can
always replace them you cannot replace your life.
Be alert and aware and find out no go areas before setting out on your own. Every big
city has dangerous areas, JHB is no different.
If you go to a club do not leave your drinks unattended – rather take them with you.
Do not go home with people you do not know and always tell a friend where you are
going.
Do not take lifts from strangers or hitchhike.
Do not open your doors to strangers and if someone claims to be from an official
organisation insist on presentation of identity before opening any doors (they can slip
it under the door). Phone any telephone number they provide if in doubt.
If you feel you are being followed whilst driving, head straight to the nearest police
station. There are signs indicating the nearest SAPS (South African Police Service) on
the side of the road.
Ref: CK/jp2010 Updated HE May 2019
65
APPENDIX
Guidelines for Honours, MA and PhD Research
1. Recommendations concerning the Honours Long Essay/ Research Project
1.1 Preamble
The Honours Long Essay (known in the School of Education as the ‘research project’)
represents the first stage of acquiring postgraduate research experience and
developing research capacity in an articulated progression which leads to the MA and
culminates in the PhD. The recommendations set out below seek to encompass a
reasonable set of standards and expectations for Honours research. These proposals
should be cross-referenced on the outcomes of the Honours degree, as tabulated in
the Faculty of Humanities’ Rules and Syllabuses book for 2019..
1.2 Expectations of the Long Essay/Research Project
Under the provisions of the new HEQF, students will be required to devote 25% of
their study (a quarter of notional study hours must come from a single product) time
at Honours level to the pursuit of a piece of research. Against this background, it is
anticipated that they should be able to formulate and complete their projects within
the framework set out below.
1.2.1 Research Question/Problem
Students should be able to ask a research question or to explore a research problem
within a clearly defined field of investigation. Supervisors should be committed to
offering suitable guidance on the definition of this question or problem.
1.2.2 Literature Review
Students should be able to demonstrate their familiarity with the key literature related
to their research question or problem. Put slightly differently, this entails an awareness
of the most important arguments and/or issues and/or debates within the designated
field. The theoretical parameters of the study should be set accordingly.
1.2.3 Research Method(s)
Candidates should be able to select and apply an appropriate method or methods to
the investigation of the given research question or problem. (The choice of method(s)
for the long essay/research project should be distinguished from the kinds of
knowledge and skill required in ‘Research Methods’ courses, which often aim to
introduce students to a range of possible techniques and approaches.)
66
1.2.4 Presentation of Findings
Here again, the requirements are fairly circumscribed, although talented students
should not be inhibited from developing their potential. It would generally be
expected that students could record and interpret their findings, while indicating an
awareness of the limitations of the particular enquiry. In empirical studies, they should
understand how to collect and analyse their data. In text-based studies, they should
be able to address the research problem within an appropriate conceptual and/or
analytical context.
1.2.5 Conclusion(s)
Students should be able to draw some conclusions from their investigations, although
they would not be required to make recommendations for further research in the field
selected. They would be expected not only to note or describe empirical evidence, but
also to adopt a reasoned position in relation to the theories or debates explored in
the review of literature. In this way, students should to a modest degree have
achieved an independent critical voice with respect to their discipline or inter-
disciplinary area.
1.3 The Honours Research Proposal
It is envisaged that Schools will put in place their own procedures for assessing
research proposals, also setting suitable deadlines within the first teaching semester.
The proposals should be simpler and briefer than those submitted by Master’s or
doctoral students, although the following elements should be included:
- a clear statement of the research question or problem which is to be investigated;
- a short rationale for the study;
- a focused literature review;
- an account of the method(s) and or theory/theories to be adopted; and
- a preliminary bibliography.
Where appropriate, students will also need to apply for Ethics clearance for their
proposed research. It is recommended that Honours students should pursue low risk
enquiries, avoiding engagement with vulnerable participants wherever possible.
67
1.4 Length of the Long Essay/Research Project
There should be an upper limit of 9,000 – 10,000 words, subject to change according
to discipline.
1.5 Submission Date
Honours research should be submitted for examination no later than 30 November,
and preferably by 31 October, of the year in which a full-time student enrols. Part-
time students would be obliged to submit by October/November of their second year
of enrolment.
1.6 Guidelines for Disciplines and Inter-Disciplinary Programmes
Given the diversity of the Faculty of Humanities, which incorporates the Social Sciences,
Literature and Language Studies, Education, the Creative Arts, and a range of general as well
as professional qualifications, it is recommended that specific disciplines or inter-disciplinary
programmes should devise their own sets of guidelines. However, it is felt that candidates
could in most cases be asked to work within broad topic areas corresponding to the research
interests of academic staff, rather than allowing individual students to nominate their own
topics. (Clearly, exceptions could be made for appropriate reasons.) The ‘topic area’ approach
is put forward as a means of encouraging discussion and mutual support among students,
reducing the burden on staff members by facilitating the sharing of aspects of the
supervisory process, and building an active community of engaged scholars. This strategy
may also promote the publication of Honours research, since several small-scale, yet
connected, studies may potentially be combined into a viable research contribution.
1.7 Challenges Facing Inter-Disciplinary Programmes
It is acknowledged that students working for the first time in an inter-disciplinary field
will have to adapt to new scholarly approaches and methods, as well as needing to
acquire knowledge for which no basis was directly laid in their undergraduate
curricula. Prompt completion of the Long Essay/Research Project may then pose a
challenge. The lecturers in inter-disciplinary programmes should therefore ensure that
suitable guidance and support is offered to their Honours candidates.
1.8 Under-Prepared Students and Opportunities for Academic Enrichment
Since some under-prepared students are admitted as postgraduates (including those
accepted on the ‘recognition of prior learning’), it is important that carefully
considered academic development programmes be provided. Staff in the Schools are
therefore alerted to the assistance available from the University’s Writing Centre, as
well as the Faculty’s teaching and learning advisers. Further support and enrichment
takes the form of the seminars, workshops and lectures arranged by the Humanities
68
Graduate Centre and the Postgraduate Project Office. The latter resources should be
drawn to the attention of all Honours students, and not only those who join Wits from
academically disadvantaged backgrounds.
1.9 Assessment Guidelines for External Examiners
The working group recommends that staff teaching Honours programmes in the
Faculty move towards the preparation of carefully considered marking memoranda for
their external examiners. This document gives the generic expectations of the long
essay/research project, but these principles should be focused and refined to reflect
the practices within particular disciplines or inter-disciplinary settings.
2. Recommendations concerning the Master’s Research Report
2.1 Preamble
At MA level, students are expected to have achieved ‘mastery’ of the research
practices, methods and techniques which are generally introduced during Honours
study or the fourth year of a professional qualification. The research report constitutes
50% of the requirement for the award of an MA by both coursework and research.
Since this degree should be completed within one year of full-time study or two years
of part-time study, the scope of the research undertaken is necessarily circumscribed,
given the prevailing time constraints and the demands imposed by the coursework.
The proposals below should be cross-referenced on the outcomes of the MA by
coursework and research report, as tabulated in the faculty of Humanities Rules and
Syllabuses book for 2019.
2.2 The Proposal for a Research Report
The Faculty of Humanities has a well-established set of requirements and procedures
for the preparation and submission of MA research proposals, although it should be
noted at the outset that the School of Education follows a different model.
Broadly speaking, the ‘external process’ operates when a proposal Reader is
nominated and approved by the Faculty; the proposal is submitted to the Faculty
Office, who submits the proposal to the Reader who assesses the proposal and
submits a written Reader report. This report is reviewed and approved by the
Assistant Dean before forwarding the evaluation to the supervisor and student.
69
This method places administrative responsibility in the hands of the Faculty staff. It
often leads to delays when Readers are slow in providing their assessments. Such
delays are compounded if the proposal requires revision, as a second round of
submission and assessment has to be negotiated.
The working group strongly recommends the adoption of the ‘internal review system’
for research report proposals, as this method can be made to function more quickly
and efficiently. Under this system, the names of the potential Reader/s are put forward
for GSC approval prior to the submission of the proposal. The student, with the
guidance of the supervisor, submits the proposal to Reader in advance of a proposal
presentation chaired by the Reader or the supervisor.
The proposal may be approved immediately, referred for minor changes, or sent back
for substantive revision. Readers are advised to offer students constructive feedback
and clear guidelines for any suggested revisions which should also be noted by the
supervisor. If revisions are requested, the Reader is also responsible for assessing and
approving a revised draft. The accepted proposal, together with its corresponding
evaluation(s), is then forwarded to the Faculty’s GSC for noting. While this approach
tends to shift the administrative burden from the Faculty office to academic staff in
the Schools, it is also more streamlined, effectively putting constructive pressure on
Readers to complete their evaluations promptly and efficiently.
The working group is concerned that a relatively small proportion of the academic
staff in the Faculty participates in the assessment of research proposals. It is therefore
recommended that this should become integral to the routine activity of all senior
lecturers, associate professors and professors. It is thus envisaged that proposal-
reading should be factored into each individual’s workload; appropriate fulfilment of
this task would, moreover, count towards the confirmation of appointments and/or
promotion, so that Readers would be duly recognized for their contribution.
To maintain the quality of the ‘internal review’ process it is suggested that, on an
annual basis, all associate professors and professors should attend at least two
research proposal sessions outside their own Schools. This would facilitate cross-
disciplinary enrichment of the research discussions, as well as providing useful
comparative perspectives across the Faculty. As a further means of quality control, the
senior member of the GSC in charge of proposal-reading would attend proposal
seminars at random, both to identify any emerging problems and to offer assistance
to staff or students.
Full-time students should be required to submit their proposals by 31 July, while part-
timers would submit by 31 March of the second year of enrolment. Where fieldwork is
70
required for the research project, the working group recommends that the proposal is
submitted earlier, so that students can take full advantage of the mid-year vacation
for data collection. Different arrangements clearly need to be made for conducting
research in schools, which close during June/July.)
2.2.1 Length of the Proposal
The length should be 3,000 – 4,000 words.
2.3 Expectations of the Research Report
It is expected that students should be able to formulate and complete their projects
within the framework set out below:
2.3.1 Research Question/Problem
The research question/problem should be multi-faceted, usually consisting of a main
question/problem and several subsidiary questions/problems. Student should,
moreover, show an understanding of the relationship between the main question and
the subsidiary questions. It is further anticipated that candidates would demonstrate
some independence in formulating these questions. (In some areas of research, the
last objective may be more effectively achieved by encouraging a cohort of students
to identify their own topics of interest in relation to a broad common theme.)
2.3.2 Literature Review
The Literature Review should demonstrate greater critical capacity than its Honours
counterpart; students should also be able to locate their enquiries within the body of
pertinent literature. A range of appropriate theories might be involved, although the
theoretical scope would necessarily be circumscribed by the time constraints imposed
on completing the research report.
2.3.3 Research Method(s)
As with the Literature Review, the application of a method – or methods – should be
more sophisticated than at Honours level. Students would need to take cognisance of
the limitations of their chosen methods, or to engage critically with those methods, or
to justify their choice of method(s). (To phrase this expectation differently, what is
required is not simply a survey of possible methods, but a clear rationale for those
selected.) Sufficient data would have to be considered to draw some meaningful
conclusions, although limitations would again be imposed by the time-frame for the
research project. These constraints should allow students to qualify the broader
71
implications of their findings, on the understanding that they are alive to the
importance of such qualifications.
2.3.4 Research Data
Yet again, students should be able to work with more complex data than at Honours
level, also mastering the increased difficulty of managing and presenting their
findings. They should be able to demonstrate how their data were collected and
grouped. Depending on the nature of the discipline and/or study, it might also be
necessary for students to separate their presentation of data from the data analysis.
However, this should not be regarded as mandatory, especially for those candidates
who are able effectively to cluster the setting out of data with the processes of
analysis.
2.3.5 Research Analysis and Interpretation
Master’s students should be able to move beyond mere description to interpreting
their data, as well as identifying significant patterns or trends. This approach should
encompass both depth in mining the richness of texts or information and breadth in
linking laterally to informing arguments and/or critical analyses. It is anticipated that
students would engage with the full range of the data collected, while explaining and
exploring the reasons for selecting key material for sharp critical focus. Beyond this,
they should be able to identify and address the discontinuities, dissonances and
contradictions in their findings without resorting to strategies for over-simplification
or homogenization.
2.3.6 Conclusions
Students should be able to draw conclusions which engage with their research
questions, even though they may not be in a position to provide clear-cut answers or
to solve the problems initially posed. In view of the limited scope of the research
report, they should avoid making formal recommendations (or generalisations in text-
based studies), seeking instead to draw out the various implications of their research
or to suggest directions for future research.
2.4 Length of the Research Report
The length of a research report should fall in the range of 20,000 to 25,000 words.
2.5 Submission Date
72
Full-time students should submit their research reports by mid-February in the year
following registration; part-time students should submit by mid-February in the
second year after initial registration. The working group suggests that extensions
without additional fee implications should be allowed until the end of February – or
perhaps the first week of March, if this can be made compatible with OSS.
At present research reports are submitted individually, as and when each student is
ready. The working group recommends that the majority of students in any cohort
should be encouraged to submit by the February deadline (just as Honours students
hand in their long essays/research projects according to the Faculty specifications and
their programme requirements). This approach would also make it possible for one or
more external examiners to assess the research performance of a given cohort, thus
providing valuable insight into the characteristic strengths and weaknesses of the
programme concerned, as well as the merits of the individual research reports.
2.6 Availability of Research Supervisors
Since the Faculty deadline for research submissions has been set in mid-February,
supervisors are frequently put under considerable pressure to comment on their
students’ work during the summer research break or at the beginning of the new
academic session. The working group recommends that supervisors be authorised to
set aside a period of 4-5 weeks in every year during which they will not be available
for consultation. These dates (which would in most cases fall during the summer
vacation) should be specified in the written agreement between each student and
his/her supervisor, and appended to the ‘Statement of Principles for Postgraduate
Supervision’. The student and supervisor would then jointly plan the progress of the
student’s research work so as to take account of the period of unavailability, while
also making sensible provision for meeting the submission deadline.
2.7 Guidelines for Disciplines and Inter-Disciplinary Programmes
Please refer to the comments concerning Honours arrangements under (1.6) and (1.7)
above. It is, however, suggested that there should be greater freedom of choice in
formulating a Master’s research project, although the ‘topic area’ approach remains
useful.
73
2.8 Under-Prepared Students and Opportunities for Academic Enrichment
Please see the comments under (1.8) above. MA students are strongly encouraged to
make use of those enrichment opportunities which are most applicable to their
research. They should seek the guidance of their supervisors in selecting from the
seminars, workshops and lectures offered by the Humanities Graduate Centre and the
Postgraduate Project Office.
2.9 Marking Memoranda for External Examiners
Please see (1.9) above. The marking memoranda for the MA in Clinical Psychology and
the MA in Community-based Counselling Psychology have been lodged in the Faculty
Office, and may be used as models by the coordinators of other programmes, if they
so wish.
3. Recommendations concerning the Master’s Dissertation
3.1 Preamble
The dissertation serves as the sole ground for the award of a Master’s degree. While it
is placed at the same level in the HEQF as the MA by coursework and research report,
its larger scope will inevitably entail greater complexity, thus imposing more stringent
demands on the successful completion of this research enterprise. In the Faculty of
Humanities, it is generally students with strong Honours results and a clear sense of
their field of research interest who elect to enrol for the MA by dissertation. It should
also be borne in mind that students may upgrade from the MA by dissertation to the
PhD. While consideration of this potentiality should not become a precondition for
admission, the prospect of upgrading tends to influence the ways in which proposals
are conceived and/or the thinking applied to writing the opening chapters of a
dissertation.
The recommendations in this section should be cross-referenced on the outcomes for
the MA by dissertation, as tabulated in the Faculty of Humanities’ Rules and
Syllabuses book for 2019. Proposals at this level should contain a theoretical
framework either as a separate category following the literature review or as a named
component of the latter.
74
3.2 The Proposal for a Master’s Dissertation
Please see the comments under (2.2) above. Since there is less pressure of time in
following the research trajectory for a dissertation, students and their supervisors may
prefer to use the ‘external process’, especially if this facilitates greater flexibility in the
choice of Readers. However, the ‘internal process’ holds considerable advantages for
dissertation candidates too, as it enables them to exchange ideas with their peers, and
to learn by collaborating with others who are shaping Master’s enquiries.
3.2.1 Length of the proposal
It should be 6,000-7,000 words.
3.3 Expectations of the Dissertation
3.3.1 Research Question/Problem
This should be more complex than the kind of research question/problem selected for
a research report, probably because a larger number of subsidiary questions is
involved, but certainly because the question/problem is associated with a more
thorough and wide-ranging investigation. Students should also show a greater degree
of initiative and independence in formulating the question/problem which is to be
explored.
3.3.2 Literature Review
This should in its turn be more complex than the Literature Review for a research
report. Students should show an understanding of the epistemological roots of the
material under examination, engaging consciously with the foundational knowledge in
their discipline or inter-disciplinary field. The major theories employed should be
drawn from primary texts, rather than a reliance on secondary sources.
3.3.3 Research Methods
Dissertation students should show an understanding of the history and development
of their chosen methods. The data collected would also need to be analysed within a
more overtly theoretical framework. Beyond this, a larger body of data would be
expected than for a research report; this information should, in turn, lead to more
meaningful conclusions than could be anticipated from a more circumscribed study.
3.3.4 Research Data
Since the corpus of data is larger and more thoroughly established than would be
expected in a research report, the presentation of findings should be more innovative
75
and nuanced, also recognising that the data would be more difficult to manage and
cluster. The student would therefore have to demonstrate effective mastery of the
techniques of data collection within the research process. In addition, it would be
important for the researcher to make informed and properly articulated decisions
about developing a system for data presentation or clustering, thus fusing critical
analysis with modes of presentation.
3.3.5 Research Analysis and Interpretation
To reiterate a key point made above, students writing a dissertation should be able to
engage critically with their data, while defending their choice of a particular method
or methods of analysis. Like research report candidates, they should have the capacity
to mine the richness of their data, while also arguing laterally in terms of the context
of the given study; however, the greater complexity of the findings will require more
sophisticated kinds of interpretation. In addition, students should achieve coherence
in their texts by demonstrating the congruence between the research questions and
their preferred methods, the literature reviewed and their data analysis. They would
also need to develop nuanced arguments to examine and explain the discontinuities,
dissonances and contradiction which emerge from a reading of their data. Finally,
students should be capable of selecting the important themes and intellectual
arguments suggested by their data, justifying their interpretations and providing an
articulated, hierarchized set of analyses.
3.3.6 Conclusion
As with the research report, it is important for students to ensure that their
conclusions both address, and relate effectively to, their research questions (without
necessarily providing a full set of solutions to the problems posed). Given their more
substantial data base, they should be able to draw out more complex implications
than the writers of research reports, as well as suggesting more carefully considered
and varied directions for further research.
3.4 Length of the Dissertation
The length of the dissertation should lie in the range of 40,000 to 45,000 words.
3.5 Submission Date
The submission date for dissertations is mid-February, with a possibility of limited
extension until the end of the month (or perhaps the first week of March). The official
registration period is one year for full-time students and two years part-time. The
working group considers it reasonable for a student to complete the dissertation
76
within two years of full-time study or three years of part-time work. It is strongly
recommended that supervisors guide their candidates towards meeting these goals.
3.6 Availability of Research Supervisors
Please see point (2.6) above; this is considered equally pertinent to dissertation
students.
3.7 Opportunities for Academic Enrichment
Dissertation students are strongly advised to take advantage of the opportunities for
enrichment provided by the Humanities Graduate Centre and the Postgraduate
Project Office. Since they do not face the same strict time constraints as candidates for
the research report, it is recommended that they use the various lectures, seminars
and workshops as a means of broadening their research horizons beyond the
immediate demands of a specific project.
4. Recommendations concerning the PhD Thesis
4.1 Preamble
The PhD is the highest qualification which a student can earn by conducting
independent research under supervision. The thesis should make a recognizable
contribution to knowledge in the field of study, as well as containing material of
publishable quality. It is clearly desirable that Master’s research should also be
publishable, and students should be given assistance in preparing their work for
submission to journals or perhaps academic publishing houses. However, achieving a
publishable standard is essential for the acceptance of a doctoral thesis.
This overview provides broad generic recommendations concerning the expectations
of a PhD thesis. It is acknowledged that a thesis may include creative work or
publications. These variations on the PhD model are treated in the appropriate Faculty
and Senate documents. Nonetheless, the working group suggests that the comments
which follow may have useful application to all doctoral candidates.
4.2 The Proposal for a PhD Thesis
The proposal for a PhD thesis is assessed by two specialist reviewers, whereas only one
academic Reader is required for Master’s proposals, one of whom should be external to the
Universty.The appraisal should be conducted both rigorously and meticulously, since the
successful completion of a substantial research undertaking is at stake. The internal review
process is NOT permitted for doctoral proposals.
77
However, a department may wish to have its doctoral candidates conduct a presentation –
either individually, or in groups - for constructive feedback from academic staff and
other postgraduate students before the final proposal is submitted to Faculty.
.
4.2.1 Length of the proposal
It should be 8,000 – 10,000 words.
4.3 Expectations of the Thesis
4.3.1 Research Question/Problem
The research question/problem and the subsidiary questions/problems should deliver
an original contribution in terms of their theoretical import, conceptualization or
application within a particular disciplinary or inter-disciplinary field. Such
questions/problems may lead to the extension of disciplinary boundaries or to the
modification of disciplinary and/or inter-disciplinary fields.
4.3.2 Literature Review
The Literature Review should give evidence of wide reading, even if all the works
consulted are not explicitly considered in the final text. The student should be able to
focus on particular areas of knowledge, using refined arguments to demonstrate why
a particular selection of literature has been made. It is essential that the student can
engage critically with the existing literature, setting up possibilities for ‘entering into a
conversation’ with established paradigms, theories, views or practices (rather than
merely reporting on or summarizing available resources). A section entitled
“theoretical framework” may appear separately or as a named component of the
literature review.
4.3.3 Research Methods
Students need to demonstrate an understanding of the epistemology informing their
research methods, thus engaging productively with the ways in which these practices
or approaches have come to be construed in the intellectual environment. They
should be able to develop a coherent structure for the research enquiry (for example,
by showing how various research sites or constellations of texts may be connected
and/or contrasted). It is expected that candidates would be able to reflect
78
constructively on their research experience, evincing a higher degree of self-
consciousness than is required for either a dissertation or a research report.
4.3.4 Research Data
The data collected should show greater breadth and complexity than the findings
considered at MA level. Students should have advanced to the coherent presentation
of a wide range of data, fusing the necessary description with integrated critical
analysis. Thus a candidate’s critical, conceptual and empirical arguments should be
organized so as to interact with the major narratives that guide the construction and
recognition of knowledge in the specified research area.
4.3.5 Research Analysis and Interpretation
The interpretation of the various sets of research data should be critical and carefully
conceptualized. Because these data sets are more extensive and richer than MA
findings, the analysis needs to be correspondingly more complex and more effectively
nuanced. In this way, the refined thematic or conceptual arguments which are
developed out of the research should be located in a dialogue with existing literature
and/or disciplinary practices. A PhD student must therefore produce an original
contribution to an established body of literature or an innovation with respect to
research method. It is not essential to generate a new theory, but fresh angles should
be explored so as to complement or enrich current theories. An appropriately
contextualised research investigation might, for instance, interlock with, illuminate and
point to the realignment of the existing literature in a field.
4.3.6 Conclusion
A PhD thesis should arrive at more complex and subtle critical or conceptual
arguments in relation to the original research questions/problems than Master’s
studies are expected to achieve. These conclusions must position the student’s
contribution effectively in terms of existing knowledge in the discipline or inter-
disciplinary area.
4.4 Length of the Thesis
The length of a PhD thesis should lie in the range of 75,000 to 85,000 words.
4.5 Submission Date
The submission date for doctoral theses is mid-February, with the possibility of a short
extension until the end of the month (or perhaps early March). The official registration
period for a PhD is two years full-time or three years part-time. The working group
79
considers these time allocations to be unrealistic, and argues that it would be
reasonable for a doctoral candidate to complete the thesis within three years of full-
time study, while enrolment for four years would not be inappropriate. Part-time
students would thus be expected to complete their research within four to five years.
4.6 Availability of Research Supervisors
Please see section (2.6) above; these conditions are considered to be equally
applicable to PhD students.
4.7 Opportunities for Academic Enrichment
It is expected that doctoral students will make informed and constructive use of the
opportunities for research enrichment provided by the Faculty of Humanities and the
University.
Revisions for research guidelines by:
Dr Haseenah Ebrahim, Assistant Dean for Graduate Studies 29 May 2019
Ms Hale Modau, Registrar, Faculty of Humanities 19 March 2019